:00:26. > :00:31.Afternoon, folks. Welcome to the Daily Politics. Celebrities,
:00:31. > :00:35.politicians. Now it's the phone of a murdered school girl. Where will
:00:35. > :00:41.the phone hacking scandal end? We'll be speaking to the Chairman
:00:41. > :00:45.of the Press Complaints Commission. Ed Miliband wants the right to
:00:45. > :00:53.choose his own Shadow Cabinet but will it be enough to stamp his
:00:53. > :01:03.authority on the party? And the government want to make it easier
:01:03. > :01:07.
:01:07. > :01:10.to complain. But will it make any All that in the next half hour.
:01:10. > :01:15.With us for the whole programme today is Conservative Peer and
:01:15. > :01:18.Chairman of the Press Complaints Commission, Baroness Peta Buscombe.
:01:18. > :01:21.Now the shocking allegations that a private detective working for the
:01:21. > :01:25.News of the World was involved in hacking the phone of murdered
:01:25. > :01:28.school girl Milly Dowler. Detectives from Scotland Yard will
:01:28. > :01:31.meet executives from the paper to discuss the claims this morning.
:01:31. > :01:41.It's the latest in a string of stories about the activities of the
:01:41. > :01:42.
:01:42. > :01:45.paper's journalists. We have the background. Yes, I do, Andrew.
:01:45. > :01:47.After Milly Dowler's disappearance in March 2002 it's claimed that
:01:47. > :01:49.Glenn Mulcaire, a private investigator working for the News
:01:49. > :01:53.of the World, illegally intercepted, and then deleted, messages from
:01:53. > :01:58.friends and relatives left on Milly's mobile phone. He was
:01:58. > :02:01.apparently trying to make room for more messages. It's claimed that
:02:01. > :02:11.these actions gave Milly's family false hope that she might still
:02:11. > :02:12.
:02:12. > :02:15.have been alive. The phone hacking story first blew up in 2006 when Mr
:02:15. > :02:18.Mulcaire and the News of the World's royal editor, Clive Goodman,
:02:18. > :02:21.were found to have hacked into the phones of members of the royal
:02:21. > :02:24.household. Both Mulcaire and Goodman were jailed in 2007. Since
:02:24. > :02:34.then dozens of other politicians and celebrities have claimed they
:02:34. > :02:34.
:02:34. > :02:37.were illegally targeted by the newspaper. In January, the High
:02:37. > :02:40.Court will hear claims from various test cases including Jude Law,
:02:40. > :02:43.Labour MP Chris Bryant and interior designer Kelly Hoppen. These
:02:43. > :02:45.developments raise tricky questions, not only for the News of the World,
:02:45. > :02:53.but its owner, Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation, which is planning
:02:53. > :02:57.a full takeover of the broadcaster BSkyB. A matter currently being
:02:57. > :03:03.considered by the government. The Prime Minister, who's in
:03:04. > :03:10.Afghanistan, was asked about the matter this morning.
:03:10. > :03:16.As for the issue of BSkyB, and the takeover issue, that has to be
:03:16. > :03:21.followed in a correct legal way. The Government, on these processes,
:03:21. > :03:24.is acting in a judicial way and it's quite right the Secretary of
:03:24. > :03:28.State for Culture Media and Sport carries out his role in that manner
:03:28. > :03:32.without any interference from anybody else in the Government and
:03:32. > :03:36.that one of the reasons I had abstracted myself from this process
:03:36. > :03:40.and want him to carry out his role in the way that he should under the
:03:40. > :03:43.law. That was David Cameron speaking from Afghanistan. And the
:03:43. > :03:46.Labour leader Ed Miliband has this morning called for the UK chief
:03:46. > :03:49.executive of News Corp, former News of the World Editor Rebekah Brooks,
:03:49. > :03:56.to step down from her current job. He also criticised the way the
:03:56. > :04:00.industry is regulated. The current system does not work because these
:04:00. > :04:05.abuses were going on when we had a Press Complaints Commission. Why
:04:05. > :04:09.weren't they stopping this happening? That's why we need a
:04:09. > :04:13.proper look at the proper practices of the industry so these things
:04:14. > :04:18.never ever happen again. We have heard from the Prime Minister and
:04:18. > :04:23.Leader of the Opposition. Let's now hear from Baroness Peta Buscombe.
:04:23. > :04:27.Why is it, since the start of the biggest crisis in British
:04:27. > :04:30.journalistic standards in living memory, you and the Press
:04:30. > :04:36.Complaints Commission has been missing in action? That's not true.
:04:36. > :04:44.We have not been missing in action. Words cannot describe how angry I
:04:44. > :04:49.am with this. Totally angry. First of all, I have been working really
:04:49. > :04:55.hard for the last two-and-a-half years since I arrived in 2009, to
:04:55. > :05:01.further improve, work hard, but the reality is we have to be careful.
:05:01. > :05:07.This is allegations going back to 2002. Two people went to prison in
:05:07. > :05:11.2007, but what was happening Ben was totally and utterly appalling.
:05:11. > :05:15.I understand. If you haven't been missing in action, can you tell me
:05:15. > :05:21.what a useful thing you have done to bring the news of the world and
:05:21. > :05:25.those doing the hacking to justice. We are doing it now. First of all,
:05:25. > :05:31.in 2007, we put out edicts right across the industry demanding that
:05:31. > :05:35.they introduced new guidelines and practices in terms of their
:05:35. > :05:39.internal practices within their organisations. It made no
:05:39. > :05:46.difference. Remember, these are allegations going back to what
:05:46. > :05:52.happened to 2002. What have you done it that's useful. I want to
:05:52. > :05:55.finish the question. I would like you to tell me, not issuing edicts,
:05:55. > :05:59.what you said is, I wanted everything in my power to ensure
:05:59. > :06:05.that does not behaving are brought to book. Tell me what you have done
:06:05. > :06:11.which has brought anybody to book? We are doing all we can. But what
:06:11. > :06:17.have you done? We set up a review. Following on from 2007-nine, we set
:06:17. > :06:22.up a review of what took place over those past years. We are holding
:06:23. > :06:29.the News of the world to account. In what way? There's only so much
:06:29. > :06:33.weight. Your report in 2009... is a police investigation about
:06:33. > :06:38.criminal activity. There are laws in place, statute is in place to
:06:38. > :06:42.take care of this. Those laws were not in place in 2002 but are now.
:06:42. > :06:47.We are doing all we can, given that there is a police investigation
:06:47. > :06:51.going on. I understand that but you're not answering a single
:06:51. > :06:58.question. Actually, I am not. You have not been able to tell me a
:06:58. > :07:02.single thing. Let me ask you this. In at 2009, November, you actually
:07:02. > :07:09.published a report that vindicated the News of the world. No, we
:07:09. > :07:13.didn't. Your report went along with the news of the World claimed that
:07:13. > :07:17.it was one of rogue journalist. You've indicated the News of the
:07:17. > :07:22.world and you were completely wrong. We didn't vindicate them. We said
:07:22. > :07:27.there was no evidence at that time and we doddered I personally, and
:07:27. > :07:32.the PCC, are so angry because clearly, we were misled. We said
:07:32. > :07:39.that very clearly and publicly. even attacked the Guardian a.
:07:39. > :07:42.didn't attack the Guardian. warned the Guardian not to publish
:07:42. > :07:47.things when you didn't have full evidence. But we didn't have the
:07:47. > :07:51.evidence. You implied the Guardian was wrong. The media select
:07:51. > :07:55.committee did not come up with any new evidence. You are the regulator,
:07:55. > :08:01.they are not. Yes but is only so much you can do when people are
:08:01. > :08:06.lying to us. Now we know. We didn't have the evidence them. I was not
:08:06. > :08:10.being given the truth. Who knows if there are other newspapers who have
:08:10. > :08:17.lied? But you are the regulator. You're meant to know these things.
:08:17. > :08:21.Yes, but that's like saying, anyone who has committed a crime, judges
:08:21. > :08:28.will know all the answers. That's not the case. This is what happened
:08:28. > :08:32.back in 2002, 2003, the 1990s. What was the culture of news
:08:32. > :08:39.organisations them? What was the ability of the PCC to regulate
:08:39. > :08:43.that? 0. Because it is a criminal activity and the point is, we are
:08:43. > :08:47.the regulatory body which has a hugely important role to play and
:08:47. > :08:52.it fulfils an important role in terms of regulating the press but
:08:52. > :08:57.we cannot cut across criminal activity. That said, we set up this
:08:57. > :09:01.review at the beginning of this year. We are looking at all that
:09:01. > :09:04.has taken place in the last few years. I have excellent people on a
:09:04. > :09:12.review committee. I have police from Cambridgeshire, a professor of
:09:12. > :09:20.media law. We will wait to see the results. We also talking to M I.
:09:20. > :09:26.I'm not going to let you a filibuster this interview. Not only
:09:26. > :09:32.did you implicitly attacked the Guardian, you then attacked the
:09:32. > :09:37.lawyer who testified that 6,000 people had been hacked. I'm not
:09:37. > :09:42.going into that. You had to apologise, pay damages and costs.
:09:42. > :09:46.I'm not going into that. I want to talk about what we have done, which
:09:46. > :09:51.is what you ask me in the first place. Why would you attack the
:09:51. > :09:56.lawyer who testified to the Commons that 6,000 people had been hacked
:09:56. > :10:00.and you told the Society of Editors that's not true. I didn't say that.
:10:00. > :10:07.You are misquoting me and that is totally unfair. Did you have to
:10:07. > :10:12.apologise and pay damages? I'm not going to comment on that. The PCC
:10:12. > :10:16.takes all have this incredibly seriously. For the last 2.5 years,
:10:16. > :10:22.I have been working exceptionally hard to beef up our sanctions and I
:10:22. > :10:25.have now demanded the publishers, the proprietors, because I am
:10:25. > :10:32.deeply unhappy about what has taken place. You have to understand that
:10:33. > :10:39.this is your industry. It is the journalists... A Which are your men
:10:39. > :10:46.to regulated. I'm going to ask you one more time. This is also...
:10:46. > :10:51.would like to ask you this question. Do you not feel that having sided
:10:51. > :10:59.with the news of the world, having attacked a lawyer who knew that
:10:59. > :11:05.6,000 people had been attacked, could you tell me one a useful
:11:05. > :11:11.thing that the PCC has done which is either exposing this cracking or
:11:11. > :11:17.brought people to book? You haven't done it yet. We have beefed up our
:11:17. > :11:20.sanctions, making more demands on the industry. I have demanded to
:11:20. > :11:26.see all the proprietors and I'm asking each one individually and
:11:26. > :11:30.the publishers what they had done in this area. Have you exposed any
:11:30. > :11:33.of the hacking? In the last two- and-a-half years since I had been
:11:33. > :11:41.on board, we have had one complaint about phone hacking which was
:11:41. > :11:44.withdrawn. So you haven't? This happened back in 2002. Andrew, I
:11:44. > :11:50.know it has been going on now but I didn't know that when I came on
:11:50. > :11:57.board in 2009. Let me finish. truth is, a lot is coming out now
:11:57. > :12:01.and I am so glad. I have to tell you, I have played a part. Tell me
:12:01. > :12:05.one thing you have revealed. I, and the Press Complaints Commission,
:12:05. > :12:10.were badly misled by the News of the world and I know you're
:12:10. > :12:14.laughing at that for some so you have revealed nothing? This is a
:12:14. > :12:19.criminal activity. There is a police investigation. I had a
:12:19. > :12:25.review committee. You have told us that. I know. It's difficult for me
:12:25. > :12:30.to explain. Let me ask you this final question. I cannot cut across
:12:30. > :12:34.the police investigation. You know that, Andrew. You must sense my
:12:34. > :12:39.frustration. That's not what our view was wanted. They want
:12:39. > :12:44.effectiveness. I do too. The Calcot report said it self-regulation
:12:44. > :12:48.didn't work, there would have to be statutory regulation. Is it
:12:48. > :12:52.important to everybody that self- regulation has not worked and the
:12:52. > :12:56.recommendation will have to be implemented? First of all,
:12:56. > :13:02.statutory regulation now exists for this criminal activity. The Data
:13:02. > :13:09.Protection Act,... You know what I mean, statutory regulation of the
:13:09. > :13:12.press. Yes or no? We have to be very careful about the newspaper
:13:13. > :13:16.industry regulator by the state. I am almost at my wit's end about
:13:16. > :13:20.this but, at the end of the day, I also care massive leak about the
:13:20. > :13:27.freedom of the press, responsibly, to be able to investigate
:13:27. > :13:30.wrongdoing. I'm afraid we have to leave it there. Thank you. Labour
:13:30. > :13:33.MPs are voting this evening on whether to deprive themselves of
:13:33. > :13:36.the right to chose members of the shadow cabinet. At the moment when
:13:36. > :13:40.a new leader is elected, he doesn't get to choose who sits beside him
:13:40. > :13:45.on his front bench. Oh no, his MPs and Peers get to pick who makes the
:13:45. > :13:51.grade in elections every two years. So what can we expect this evening?
:13:51. > :13:58.Our Political Correspondent Iain Watson joins us now. It has been a
:13:58. > :14:04.third of the Times, -- it has been said a few times, Iain, is this Ed
:14:04. > :14:08.Miliband's Clause 4 moment? It is certainly not bad. The result is at
:14:08. > :14:12.6:00pm. Party sources don't seem to be hanging on the edge of the seeds
:14:12. > :14:21.over this one. They expect MPs to back Ed Miliband but the vote is
:14:21. > :14:24.not binding. This is part of a much wider remit. Those reforms will
:14:24. > :14:29.have to be approved by the party conference in September and today's
:14:29. > :14:33.vote I think is the easy vote for Ed Miliband. We might stumble
:14:33. > :14:37.across a cause for moment. One of those challenges is he wants to
:14:37. > :14:41.water down the trade union influence in the party's decision-
:14:41. > :14:46.making. That may be more controversial. He also has to
:14:46. > :14:49.change the way the party leader is elected because, as you know, his
:14:49. > :14:52.tale is constantly tweak by Conservatives because he was
:14:52. > :14:57.dependent on trade union votes to beat his brother so that has to
:14:57. > :15:01.change as well. Interestingly enough, in the shadow cabinet,
:15:01. > :15:11.that's the easy bit. He a state guarantee existing Cabinet members
:15:11. > :15:12.
:15:12. > :15:16.he would not reshuffle them as soon He needs to do something quickly.
:15:16. > :15:22.According to a poll became out in the Independent yesterday, it is
:15:22. > :15:27.not looking good for him. He is less popular than Ian Duncan-Smith
:15:27. > :15:33.was when he was leader of the Conservative Party. He is more
:15:33. > :15:38.popular the Michael Howard or Michael Foot. I think, at the
:15:38. > :15:43.moment, there is a feeling around Shadow Cabinet members in the pit
:15:43. > :15:49.of their stomach that something has to be done. Ed Miliband is not
:15:49. > :15:59.punching through or getting enough impact. I think people want to see
:15:59. > :16:02.
:16:02. > :16:11.him perform better. He can help out. I do not think in any stretch his
:16:11. > :16:14.leadership is under threat. They should be doing better. We're
:16:14. > :16:17.joined now by Michael Dugher, who's the newly appointed right hand man
:16:18. > :16:27.to Ed Miliband, and by John Rentoul, chief political commentator for the
:16:27. > :16:33.Independent on Sunday and a critic of the Labour leader. Research
:16:33. > :16:37.published in the Independent today shows that Mr Miliband is more
:16:37. > :16:44.unpopular than Ian Duncan-Smith in the same stage of his leadership.
:16:44. > :16:51.We know what happened to him. has been leader for only nine
:16:51. > :16:54.months. With the cuts, it does feel longer. He has been leader for nine
:16:54. > :16:58.months. He inherited a situation where Labour suffered one of the
:16:59. > :17:03.worst defeats in our history. He knows we have to work harder and
:17:03. > :17:09.listen more. All our policies are being reviewed. He is determined to
:17:09. > :17:12.drive through big changes in the party. He is saying let's get rid
:17:12. > :17:21.of the elected Shadow Cabinet. I'm confident that will go through
:17:21. > :17:25.along with other changes. It is one of many changes I think we'll see.
:17:25. > :17:30.It is only the first step. At the Tory speech in Wrexham, the
:17:30. > :17:40.outlined a number of changes about making the Labour Party look at
:17:40. > :17:43.
:17:43. > :17:49.weird and not in word. His time running out for Ed Miliband? -- in
:17:49. > :17:53.words. I think time ran out when he took the job. I welcome the
:17:53. > :17:58.important changes he made. The Shadow Cabinet elections were
:17:58. > :18:03.ridiculous when Labour MPs voted to keep them last year. I think it is
:18:03. > :18:07.ridiculous they're voting to get rid of them today. It is not hugely
:18:07. > :18:12.important. It does matter. Any leader ought to Beale to appoint
:18:12. > :18:16.their own people. What is more important are the changes where Ed
:18:16. > :18:23.Miliband has decided he is on the side of the voters when it comes to
:18:23. > :18:27.crime and law and order. Let me bring Michael back in. Labour
:18:27. > :18:34.people have not been for him themselves over to come out and
:18:34. > :18:43.support Ed Miliband. Lord Goldsmith, when asked, does Mr Mellor band
:18:43. > :18:50.still need to prove himself? He said, yes he does. -- Ed Miliband.
:18:50. > :18:53.Is that the best Labour people can do? Most members of the Labour
:18:53. > :19:03.Party would not know who look Goldsmith was. Look at what he has
:19:03. > :19:04.
:19:04. > :19:07.done! You think his comment is of no virtue. It is not representative.
:19:07. > :19:14.We had the U-turn from this government. He has turned us into a
:19:14. > :19:18.very effective opposition. I think it is sustained pressure from the
:19:18. > :19:22.opposition. I think we get a little help along the way. He wants to
:19:22. > :19:32.turn this from an effective opposition to a future government
:19:32. > :19:36.and that means big changes. fact is, as long as Labour stays
:19:36. > :19:42.ahead in the polls, and this was not true under Iain Duncan-Smith,
:19:42. > :19:46.his personal ratings are as bad as those of Ed Miliband. The Tories
:19:46. > :19:51.are way behind Labour in the polls. As long as Labour has eight
:19:51. > :19:55.consecutive months, they were not get rid of them. I do not think it
:19:55. > :20:02.is to do with the opinion polls alone, it is to do with a lack of
:20:02. > :20:07.an alternative. The only realistic alternative is the brother of Ed
:20:07. > :20:11.Miliband. Ed Miliband is likely to lead Labour into the next election.
:20:11. > :20:16.I think the Labour Party is have a terribly bad situation. It is a bad
:20:16. > :20:18.for everyone who wants to see Labour win. How much comfort to you
:20:18. > :20:26.take from the reassuring fact that your leader is slightly more
:20:26. > :20:30.popular than Nick Clegg for --? real elections would real voters,
:20:30. > :20:36.we have won four by-elections on the bounce, including some
:20:36. > :20:43.difficult fights been in the Clyde. They have hundreds more councillors.
:20:43. > :20:48.We need to do better in the south and Scotland. It is good work in
:20:48. > :20:52.progress at the moment. You are a Tory peer. Do you share the view I
:20:52. > :21:01.have heard express several times by leading Tories that Mr Ed Miliband
:21:01. > :21:05.is the best asset you have. He is a remarkably good asset. He has taken
:21:05. > :21:10.a risk in getting rid of elections in the Shadow Cabinet. He wants
:21:10. > :21:16.people around him who he can trust and can work with. Why is there a
:21:16. > :21:21.risk? It is a risk because of the power of the trade unions. They
:21:21. > :21:25.play a hugely important role. has said, do not go on strike.
:21:25. > :21:31.reason he got elected in the first place and beat his brother was that
:21:31. > :21:36.he was put in there with the help of the trade unions. If he house
:21:36. > :21:41.them in terms of them having a say in terms of who is in the Shadow
:21:42. > :21:47.Cabinet, he is taking a risk. Maybe that risk is worth it. It is a very
:21:47. > :21:51.tough choice. I do not quite see the Tory Shadow Cabinet ever being
:21:51. > :22:00.elected but we leave it there. Are we any good at complaining in this
:22:00. > :22:02.country? Oh, yes. Some of us are champions! I'm sure our guest of
:22:02. > :22:06.the day, Peta Buscombe, chair of the Press Complaints Commission,
:22:06. > :22:09.thinks we're too good. But when we do complain, do we get an adequate
:22:09. > :22:19.response? The Government is currently consulting on how to make
:22:19. > :22:26.
:22:26. > :22:29.it easier to make a fuss. Giles has been looking into this himself. We
:22:29. > :22:34.Brits are not natural complainers. There was a generation, is
:22:34. > :22:39.something was wrong, they would just say, we just won't come again.
:22:39. > :22:49.But we have got better. We are complaining more and arguably it is
:22:49. > :22:56.
:22:56. > :23:03.Mrs Peggy for Clarke wrote to us about her dustbin. It left with the
:23:03. > :23:07.dust men one morning and it is still missing. They told me I could
:23:07. > :23:13.have a bag or a sack. Other sooner have a been so went to bring it
:23:13. > :23:20.back. Being able to complaint is a fundamental democratic right. It is
:23:20. > :23:25.up to you to grasp the nettle and complain. Keep going! Why, oh why,
:23:25. > :23:29.oh why? Most Brits will not still complaint unless it is something
:23:29. > :23:34.that is really important because they do not think it would make any
:23:34. > :23:38.difference. I think it is changing slowly. There are more channels. It
:23:38. > :23:48.is easy to work of any male will send a tweet to an organisation
:23:48. > :23:50.
:23:50. > :23:59.that has annoyed you. -- whack off an e-mail. People who e-mail are
:23:59. > :24:02.nearly always happier than people who write in. I am being held in
:24:02. > :24:07.ecus. Michael is extremely important to them, apparently. If
:24:07. > :24:12.it were, Your coverage of person at the end of the phone. The real
:24:12. > :24:16.problem is having a real person to complain to. In giant organisations,
:24:16. > :24:24.you may have an e-mail address but there's no real person you can talk
:24:24. > :24:31.to. You have a suspicion that you are hitting a bit of the computer
:24:31. > :24:38.which gets a standard response. Thank you so much the of bread-and-
:24:38. > :24:44.butter reply to my complaint. us an e-mail to this address and we
:24:44. > :24:50.will send a standard reply back is about appearing to care. We do
:24:50. > :24:56.think we're getting more angry as a society. We asked people and they
:24:56. > :24:59.say, a no. If all else fails, I suggest to become a freelance
:24:59. > :25:09.reporter for Horse and Hound and grin of the Press Office.
:25:09. > :25:14.
:25:14. > :25:19.usually does have an effect. -- Even if you do not talk to a
:25:19. > :25:25.machine, sometimes you talk to a person who is reading off a sheet.
:25:25. > :25:30.They have prescribed answers. not ring up. You are going to be
:25:30. > :25:35.listening to music for the long time. It is remarkable how long it
:25:35. > :25:41.takes. The written word is far more effective. Who reads this? I
:25:42. > :25:46.imagine they are piled underpins. You need to personalise the
:25:46. > :25:52.complaint and find an individual to write to. Do not just write to the
:25:52. > :25:59.chief executive, write to the financial director. How do you
:25:59. > :26:05.respond to those letters which are addressed to you personally? I am
:26:05. > :26:15.so pro complaints. You say I do not welcome complaints, that is what
:26:15. > :26:15.
:26:15. > :26:20.the other full. I asked the question. -- what we are there for.
:26:20. > :26:25.We put up a fantastic new advertising campaign to encourage
:26:25. > :26:29.the public to come to us. It is easier to complain now, which is
:26:30. > :26:35.good. It is channelled so people have the right outcomes. Sometimes
:26:35. > :26:39.companies want to give you the appearance they are caring and
:26:39. > :26:43.sharing. They pay lip service to the idea of complaining. London
:26:43. > :26:51.Underground will give you a little token if you tick the boxes. That
:26:51. > :26:59.is what they want you to do. I'll weep easily fobbed off? We are. --
:27:00. > :27:04.are weep easily fobbed off? What we really crave is a dialogue with a
:27:04. > :27:11.real human being. I am surprised to say that. You should see some of
:27:11. > :27:16.the deters of the way that people complain to us. -- the details. It
:27:16. > :27:21.is a public service, people come to us. We work closely with all sorts
:27:21. > :27:26.of agencies. We resolve complaints to the satisfaction of most people.
:27:26. > :27:31.We care about the harm and the hurt they have felt at the butt end of
:27:31. > :27:37.the press. Someone watching us wants to complain about this
:27:37. > :27:41.programme, what do they do? report came up last week saying
:27:41. > :27:46.that the worst place in the world to complain to is the BBC for a
:27:46. > :27:55.stub your complaints system is of rubbish. I would not e-mail, I
:27:55. > :28:01.would not write in. Try and find an individual. I to take the point
:28:01. > :28:05.that people do care. The managing director of Tesco and Marks &
:28:05. > :28:14.Spencer does care about the organisation. Why don't I just
:28:14. > :28:22.write a block where her moan about it? It gets tweeted. -- a block,
:28:22. > :28:28.where I moan about it. The moment it is on the internet, it can be
:28:28. > :28:37.inflammatory. Go back to an old- fashioned expression. I love a good
:28:37. > :28:44.moan. If you want to complain, do not write to me, right to Anita.
:28:44. > :28:48.Tamara is Prime Minister's Questions and we are on early. --