:00:37. > :00:42.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:43. > :00:45.The Chairman of the Iraq Inquiry, Sir John Chilcot, says Tony Blair
:00:46. > :00:48.was not "straight with the nation" about his decisions in the run
:00:49. > :00:52.He's been speaking to the BBC exactly a year after
:00:53. > :00:59.As Jeremy Corbyn addresses business leaders we speak to one of Labour's
:01:00. > :01:04.biggest donors about the party's relationship with business.
:01:05. > :01:06.We've always known about the Conservative's historical
:01:07. > :01:09.Now Labour politicians can't agree either.
:01:10. > :01:20.First it was ties, now the Parliamentary modernisers have
:01:21. > :01:23.something else in their sights, which is really getting
:01:24. > :01:24.up the noses of more traditional parliamentarians.
:01:25. > :01:38.Yes, when Wimbledon is on we know our place.
:01:39. > :01:41.And with us for the whole of the programme today
:01:42. > :01:42.is John Mills, businessman, economist, Labour donor
:01:43. > :02:00.Quite unlike eclectic mix, an unusual combination. It is a bit.
:02:01. > :02:07.Are you still given the election did not produce the result that Theresa
:02:08. > :02:11.May wanted are you confident that Brexit is going to happen? It is
:02:12. > :02:16.going to be more difficult. The government had a pretty clear way
:02:17. > :02:22.ahead coming out of the single market and the customs union,
:02:23. > :02:26.negotiating a free trade deal, but to get their Britain has to be
:02:27. > :02:32.prepared if it could not get a reasonable deal to walk away and
:02:33. > :02:36.trade on WTO terms and I do not think WTO terms would get through
:02:37. > :02:41.Parliament so it weakens our position. A huge chunk of the
:02:42. > :02:47.Parliamentary Labour Party is for the remain. We saw 50 rebels last
:02:48. > :02:55.week for an Amendment. Is not one of the things that helps Theresa Maythe
:02:56. > :03:02.fact that Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell asked on she was kept the?
:03:03. > :03:08.Historically they have been. They have been under enormous pressure to
:03:09. > :03:12.draw the line on the general line the Labour Party has taken and I
:03:13. > :03:16.think they are not exactly trapped but held in that position. Their
:03:17. > :03:21.capacity for manoeuvre is quite limited. On the crucial issue of
:03:22. > :03:29.membership of the single market as opposed to access, many, like Chuka
:03:30. > :03:34.Umunna, want to still be members of the single market. Jeremy Corbyn and
:03:35. > :03:38.John McDonnell are not arguing that. Although they would not say so in
:03:39. > :03:43.public they are closer to the government's position that we can be
:03:44. > :03:48.members but we need to try to get as much access as possible. That is
:03:49. > :03:59.right. You cannot be outside the European Union and still have free
:04:00. > :04:03.movement of goods and particularly... That Chuka Umunna is
:04:04. > :04:06.asking for. Trade is a different matter. That is the access part that
:04:07. > :04:10.is very important. After seven years in the making
:04:11. > :04:12.the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq war was finally published this time
:04:13. > :04:15.last year, and it made rather uncomfortable
:04:16. > :04:17.reading for Tony Blair. Now a year on Sir John Chilcot spoke
:04:18. > :04:20.exclusively to the BBC about the report, and yet again
:04:21. > :04:24.Mr Blair is likely to be feeling The Chilcot Inquiry was announced
:04:25. > :04:32.in 2009 by the then Prime Minister Gordon Brown
:04:33. > :04:34.with the remit to "identify Among the findings the report found
:04:35. > :04:43.that military action was in fact not the last resort and other peaceful
:04:44. > :04:48.means could have been tried first. The inquiry went on to say
:04:49. > :04:52.in March 2003 Saddam Hussein was not an imminent threat,
:04:53. > :04:57.arguing the intelligence had "not established beyond doubt" that Iraq
:04:58. > :05:02.had continued to produce chemical weapons and that the legal
:05:03. > :05:04.basis for military action In terms of the aftermath of the war
:05:05. > :05:12.the inquiry found the planning and Speaking exclusively to the BBC
:05:13. > :05:20.today Sir John said Tony Blair was "not straight with the nation"
:05:21. > :05:24.about his decision to go to war and argued that the former
:05:25. > :05:29.Prime Minister made the case "pinning it
:05:30. > :05:32.on belief, not on the fact". Let's take a quick look at some
:05:33. > :05:44.of Laura's interview. I hesitate to say this but I think
:05:45. > :05:48.it was from his perspective and standpoint emotionally truthful and
:05:49. > :05:55.I think that came out in his press conference after the launch
:05:56. > :06:00.statement. He was under very great emotional pressure during those
:06:01. > :06:05.sessions, far more than the committee. He was suffering. He was
:06:06. > :06:12.deeply engaged. In that state of mind than mood you fall back on your
:06:13. > :06:18.instinctive skills and reactions I think. He was relying therefore on a
:06:19. > :06:22.motion of fact? Both. I'm joined now by Conservative MP
:06:23. > :06:24.John Baron, who voted And Matthew Doyle is a former
:06:25. > :06:42.special adviser to Tony Blair The quote that makes the headlines,
:06:43. > :06:47.not straight with the nation, referring to Tony Blair, many people
:06:48. > :06:52.will be watching and say why did John Chilcote not say this at the
:06:53. > :06:55.time? In a way he did. He made it clear in his report that the
:06:56. > :06:59.peaceful options had not been exhausted at the time before
:07:00. > :07:02.committing troops to war and given that committing troops to what is
:07:03. > :07:06.the most serious Acte Parliament can take many of us said there was not
:07:07. > :07:11.enough evidence at the time. Which is why a good number of others voted
:07:12. > :07:19.against. Did he pull his punches the way Rob Butler dead? Is this a
:07:20. > :07:24.typical senior British civil servant who wants to have it both ways? Does
:07:25. > :07:29.the reporter does not make too many waves and a year later gives the
:07:30. > :07:34.colour quote. I would suggest that had come out at the time the report
:07:35. > :07:38.would be much more devastating. Personally I think the reporters
:07:39. > :07:43.devastating anyway. If you read the report at the time, which we all
:07:44. > :07:48.did, it was clear that despite good intentions there was not evidence.
:07:49. > :07:52.We went to war on a false premise. All peaceful options had not been
:07:53. > :07:59.exhausted and there was the shambles afterwards. That was laid out. Maybe
:08:00. > :08:04.Sir John Chilcot feels he had to clarify that but for many of us it
:08:05. > :08:08.was in black and white. Not straight with the nation, that is the damning
:08:09. > :08:13.criticism. It is the bit you have chosen to take out of the interview
:08:14. > :08:16.to run as a story. You could also look at the fact he said that Tony
:08:17. > :08:21.Blair had not departed from the truth. You could have chosen that as
:08:22. > :08:25.your headline. You could have referred to what he said that the
:08:26. > :08:30.liaison committee in 2016 when he said he absorbed Tony Blair from any
:08:31. > :08:36.charge of misleading Parliament or the public. What does he mean by not
:08:37. > :08:42.straight with the nation? Is he saying contradictory things? He is
:08:43. > :08:45.talking much more about the style than the substance under way in
:08:46. > :08:50.which Tony Blair addressed the hearings. He referred to the
:08:51. > :08:52.emotions of it. It is hardly surprising that an elected
:08:53. > :08:56.politician is going to take a different approach to these things
:08:57. > :09:02.than a senior civil servant but on the point of substance the thing we
:09:03. > :09:05.have learned from the Chilcot interview is that Tony Blair went to
:09:06. > :09:11.the chair of the joint intelligence committee on the evil four and said
:09:12. > :09:18.it is this beyond reasonable doubt? The chair said it was and Chilcot
:09:19. > :09:25.says Tony Blair was entitled to believe that. Indeed. He went to the
:09:26. > :09:27.chair of the joint intelligence committee, the most senior
:09:28. > :09:32.intelligence officer in this country, can you tell me beyond
:09:33. > :09:39.reasonable doubt that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction? The
:09:40. > :09:45.answer was yes I can. Even Chilcot says he was entitled to rely on
:09:46. > :09:52.that. Yes. But we went to war on false premise. There were no weapons
:09:53. > :09:57.mass destruction. We also have to look at the evidence presented to us
:09:58. > :10:01.on the day. We all remember the dodgy dossier and the evidence or
:10:02. > :10:07.lack of it. There was a lack of concrete evidence with regard to
:10:08. > :10:12.WMD. That is not that the head of the joint intelligence committee
:10:13. > :10:18.told him. You cannot blame Tony Blair for him being wrong. You ask
:10:19. > :10:23.questions that you want a positive answer to in some respect and you go
:10:24. > :10:27.hunting for those. The most senior intelligence officer at the time
:10:28. > :10:34.simply told Tony Blair what he wanted to hear? If you look at what
:10:35. > :10:37.evidence that exchange was based on, what evidence was actually there
:10:38. > :10:41.available to the intelligence services, it was not enough to make
:10:42. > :10:45.the case for war. Many of us looked at that evidence in very close
:10:46. > :10:53.detail under was hardly any there. The spin doctors had a field day. It
:10:54. > :10:59.is not true to say there was no evidence. There was international
:11:00. > :11:04.consensus that Saddam had an active WMD programme. That sadly turned out
:11:05. > :11:07.not to be the case. Focus on the substance of the report rather than
:11:08. > :11:12.trying to start with conspiracy theories about what was agreed when
:11:13. > :11:18.and all the rest of it. I do not think we have mentioned any of that.
:11:19. > :11:22.The fundamentals of the report that have not changed, volume one
:11:23. > :11:27.concludes there was no secret deal in April 2000 and two. William four
:11:28. > :11:32.concludes the intelligence was not used in a false or misleading way.
:11:33. > :11:39.The cabinet was not deceived or misled. Focus on the substance. Let
:11:40. > :11:42.us look at the evidence. The United Nations at the end of the day made
:11:43. > :11:48.it very clear and Chilcot referred to this that the were not going to
:11:49. > :11:51.give it carte blanche, they wanted the arms specialist to do their time
:11:52. > :11:57.and complete their role which they never did. They could not find the
:11:58. > :12:02.WMD because they were not there. The UN did not claim at the time there
:12:03. > :12:08.was no WMD. They asked for more time. You have to base your
:12:09. > :12:15.interventions on some sort of legitimacy otherwise we are going to
:12:16. > :12:21.be living... In a world where you intervene... Whether it was right or
:12:22. > :12:30.wrong or whether Tony Blair believes there was WMD or not,... You cannot
:12:31. > :12:33.dismiss it like that. We know these statements were truthful at the
:12:34. > :12:39.time. They turned out not to be true. He may have believed them to
:12:40. > :12:50.be true. Only he knows that. That is not semantics. The fact is, there
:12:51. > :12:55.was no WMD and secondly we had no real preparations for rebuilding a
:12:56. > :13:02.country that we were invading, which in a sense seems to me, that is a
:13:03. > :13:06.more damning criticism, because you could have done something, you could
:13:07. > :13:11.be genuinely wrong about WMD but you cannot invade... When you look at
:13:12. > :13:17.the plans this country made with America for the rebuilding of
:13:18. > :13:25.Germany after 1945, it was made a mile from here,... It was wrong in
:13:26. > :13:29.the end. No question. There was clearly a sell you are in the
:13:30. > :13:35.planning. I mean the invasion was wrong. That is a different argument
:13:36. > :13:40.whether you believe it was right to get rid of Saddam Hussein and his
:13:41. > :13:44.two sons. There is always a consequence to not taking action.
:13:45. > :13:50.Libya, where we did something. Syria, we have done nothing. Iraq,
:13:51. > :13:56.we have done a lot. I will come back to these. In all of those
:13:57. > :14:01.interventions you could argue we have failed because we have not
:14:02. > :14:08.created a stable democracy and Libyan intervention has not worked.
:14:09. > :14:13.Iraq, the evidence was exceptionally thin, this was reflected in the
:14:14. > :14:15.United Nations who were urging caution because there was weapons
:14:16. > :14:21.inspectors who had not been given enough time. We were marching to an
:14:22. > :14:24.American military timetable and there were no WMD and the
:14:25. > :14:30.follow-through was a disaster. We should have learned the lessons of
:14:31. > :14:35.1945 and instead we disbanded the infrastructure around the country
:14:36. > :14:38.went into shambles. People on both sides of this argument are always on
:14:39. > :14:48.lessons to be learned but as I look at Iraq, where we intervened and
:14:49. > :14:53.occupied, a mess. Libya, we intervened but did not occupy, a
:14:54. > :15:00.mess. Syria, we have not really intervened or occupied, a mess. What
:15:01. > :15:04.other lessons? It is difficult to drop any conclusions about the best
:15:05. > :15:10.thing to do in these circumstances. My view about the Iraq war at the
:15:11. > :15:15.time was I was against that not because I was concerned about
:15:16. > :15:19.principles of getting United Nations support, it just seemed to me to be
:15:20. > :15:24.a risky enterprise, I'm clear what the outcome was going to be or what
:15:25. > :15:26.would be achieved. Too risky. On the hole that was a good reason for not
:15:27. > :15:37.supporting the war. I think you have to leave open the
:15:38. > :15:41.possibility of limited intervention. The lesson from Iraq and subsequent
:15:42. > :15:45.interventions is that these large interventions in the hope we will
:15:46. > :15:50.create a liberal democracy, we've got to be very careful about that
:15:51. > :15:53.because one we don't have the resources, two the intelligence is
:15:54. > :16:00.usually bad and we don't plan thoroughly. Brief and final word, we
:16:01. > :16:04.only have a half-hour programme. Let's look at the substance of the
:16:05. > :16:09.report rather than what John Chilcot has said today which is more about
:16:10. > :16:12.style. Don't forget in this interview John Chilcot said Tony
:16:13. > :16:18.Blair did not depart from the truth and that is fundamental. Good to
:16:19. > :16:21.face both of you at once, thank you both very much.
:16:22. > :16:23.This morning Jeremy Corbyn has been addressing the British Chambers
:16:24. > :16:26.In his speech he says Labour must embrace technological
:16:27. > :16:29.change and that he wasn't a "doom-monger" about mechanisation.
:16:30. > :16:31.Jobs have and would continue to be "lost, replaced
:16:32. > :16:36.After the election Labour may be on a high, but are they now trusted
:16:37. > :16:40.Ellie has been taking a look at Labour's tricky
:16:41. > :16:53.In 1998 Peter Mandelson said he was intensely relaxed about people
:16:54. > :16:58.getting filthy rich. But he did add as long as they pay taxes. It was a
:16:59. > :17:03.phrase that rightly or wrongly would come to symbolise new Labour's
:17:04. > :17:08.approach to big business. But the wooing of the city began long before
:17:09. > :17:14.Tony Blair, in what critics called the proper cocktail offensive. Never
:17:15. > :17:19.have so many crustaceans died in vain. In the mid-80s Neil Kinnock
:17:20. > :17:22.set up regional policy Forum on a Friday afternoon when members of the
:17:23. > :17:29.front bench would meet with people in the business community. By 1983
:17:30. > :17:33.when I became leader the party had gained a reputation because of its
:17:34. > :17:40.internal conduct for being reckless and feckless. We knew it was no good
:17:41. > :17:46.just trying a charm offensive, or to try and do it through propaganda, it
:17:47. > :17:53.had to do with substance. So very early on we started developing very
:17:54. > :17:57.practical prosaic policies for the improvement of industrial training,
:17:58. > :18:01.the financing of infrastructure, the encouragement of research and
:18:02. > :18:06.development and new technology. And our task then was to communicate
:18:07. > :18:10.that to the people who were making decisions. Labourers close
:18:11. > :18:15.relationship with business was a key part of the party 's success in the
:18:16. > :18:20.late 90s and 2000's but it began to be criticised as too close. By the
:18:21. > :18:24.time Ed Miliband made this speech in 2011 the rhetoric had changed.
:18:25. > :18:30.Growth is built on sand if it comes from predators and not our
:18:31. > :18:34.producers. The former CBI chief described that as a divisive kick in
:18:35. > :18:41.the teeth for business. But there was more than a nod in this years
:18:42. > :18:43.Labour manifesto some of Ed Miliband's policies. We are asking
:18:44. > :18:48.the better off under big corporations to pay a little bit
:18:49. > :18:53.more. So what the business think of that? A lot of what got the
:18:54. > :18:55.attention were comments around nationalisation, deep intervention
:18:56. > :19:01.in business and the message coming out of that is government is going
:19:02. > :19:05.to be bigger and more visible and that is a hard sell to business
:19:06. > :19:09.people. But on the other hand would you have got our specific
:19:10. > :19:13.commitments around business rates and reforming local business
:19:14. > :19:18.taxation on vocational education, guaranteeing residency rights for EU
:19:19. > :19:25.nationals so it's a much more nuanced picture. But do voters even
:19:26. > :19:28.mind if Labour policy is not overtly pro-business? The pendulum swung in
:19:29. > :19:33.the other direction, zero-hour contracts, I think, I don't think
:19:34. > :19:37.trade unions are the biggest problem in the workplace today, it's more
:19:38. > :19:40.likely to be an overbearing manager so I think the pendulum has swung
:19:41. > :19:45.more in the direction of the left on these issues and you can see that in
:19:46. > :19:51.the way Theresa May has changed her standards converter David Cameron.
:19:52. > :19:56.People applaud the policies are sensible, necessary and realistic,
:19:57. > :20:04.the components of policy, Jeremy and John McDonnell have yet to get the
:20:05. > :20:09.credibility that will give that the assurance to working class people as
:20:10. > :20:16.well as owners and investors that this is the core of the policy. It
:20:17. > :20:18.is patriotic, it's practical, it will be implemented, it's for sure.
:20:19. > :20:21.And our guest of the day, John Mills, is an entrepreneur,
:20:22. > :20:31.If you are in business and you are working really hard every hour God
:20:32. > :20:37.sends to build things up, accumulate wealth for yourself and your family
:20:38. > :20:43.through hard work, why would you vote for Jeremy Corbyn's Labour
:20:44. > :20:46.Party? Why would you vote Conservative? The trouble is both
:20:47. > :20:51.parties don't have clear idea about how to get the economy to grow fast,
:20:52. > :20:55.we have low levels of investment. But I have got you today so let's
:20:56. > :20:59.stick with Labour, you raise a good point that a lot of business people
:21:00. > :21:02.do not bind the Conservative Party business friendly at the moment and
:21:03. > :21:14.if you were a Tory that is what I would ask but I'm here to ask you
:21:15. > :21:18.about Labour. I don't think the Labour manifesto said a great deal
:21:19. > :21:20.about business and I don't think what it was proposing would be a
:21:21. > :21:23.huge threat. The crucial thing about the British economy is if we can get
:21:24. > :21:26.it to grow better and get living standards up. If you have to choose
:21:27. > :21:28.between what Labour are offering and the Conservatives are offering an
:21:29. > :21:31.economic policy there is not a huge difference. Labour needs to develop
:21:32. > :21:34.sweeter policies to convert the electorate they can get the economy
:21:35. > :21:42.to run better and I think that is the big challenge over the next few
:21:43. > :21:46.years. Jeremy Corbyn's manifesto was going to add seven percentage points
:21:47. > :21:52.to corporation tax so if you are in business he will taxi more on the
:21:53. > :21:56.profits. And if you, through your hard work, managed to earn more than
:21:57. > :22:04.?80,000 a year everything above that he will take over half of. And
:22:05. > :22:08.there's going to be a lot more regulation and controls and state
:22:09. > :22:13.intervention. None of that is particularly appealing to business
:22:14. > :22:16.is it? I'm not sure it is but I think the country can afford to be
:22:17. > :22:20.taxed about more than it is at the moment and there is a strong urge in
:22:21. > :22:25.the economy to get a bit more redistribution than we've seen.
:22:26. > :22:28.Would you do it the way the manifesto suggested? I would do it
:22:29. > :22:35.slightly differently but I think the basic objectives are exactly right.
:22:36. > :22:40.Are you now reconciled to Jeremy Corbyn's leadership of the party? He
:22:41. > :22:43.did well during the election and I think what is now happening is more
:22:44. > :22:51.moderate elements in the party are falling behind him. Or being purged.
:22:52. > :22:55.Maybe but I think most will stick around. What needs to be done now is
:22:56. > :23:00.fill out the aspirations of the party set out in the manifesto with
:23:01. > :23:06.policies which will deliver if the Labour Party becomes elected. So
:23:07. > :23:10.what would be top of the list of those policies? I think what we need
:23:11. > :23:17.to do is get the growth rate up, get the investment level up. These are
:23:18. > :23:20.not policies they are aspirations. My personal view is that the main
:23:21. > :23:27.reason the economy is in such bad shape is it is uncompetitive, we
:23:28. > :23:31.have got exchange rates which are a lethal for manufacturing so we have
:23:32. > :23:39.the industrialised, even as late as 19 seven
:23:40. > :23:56.America is 10%. 20% or something. Where? In America, I think it's 13%
:23:57. > :23:59.compared to less than 10% here. What has happened is a whole of the
:24:00. > :24:04.Western world has the industrialised and this is one of the problems. Are
:24:05. > :24:08.you confident Jeremy Corbyn will give more, what word should I use,
:24:09. > :24:14.more concern about the needs of business? I think the Labour Party
:24:15. > :24:16.understands too clearly that the business world, if it does not
:24:17. > :24:21.flourish everything else goes wrong so that's a given that operates
:24:22. > :24:25.across all political parties. I don't think the whole business world
:24:26. > :24:28.will beat the stabilised by some relatively small increases in
:24:29. > :24:32.taxation but the crucial thing across the piece is to get policies
:24:33. > :24:35.in place which will produce more economic growth and more equality.
:24:36. > :24:56.Rising living standards. Yes, the snuff box was introduced
:24:57. > :24:59.over 300 years ago when smoking was first banned in the House of
:25:00. > :25:01.Commons. It is the property of
:25:02. > :25:06.the Principal Doorkeeper, who personally funds the supply,
:25:07. > :25:10.and his name, as well as all his predecessors for the last 70 years,
:25:11. > :25:13.is inscribed on the lid. Here are the Clerk of the Commons
:25:14. > :25:16.and the Principal Doorkeeper trying it out, from the Inside the Commons
:25:17. > :25:19.documentary broadcast last year. The principal doorkeeper Robin Fell
:25:20. > :25:23.has worked here for over 40 years and they share a delight in customs
:25:24. > :25:28.from the past. Until recently snuff
:25:29. > :25:38.was provided free to members. I don't have it as serious, what I
:25:39. > :25:48.refer to as weapons grade snuff. And we are joined now
:25:49. > :26:09.by Michael Cockerell, How many did you make, two, three?
:26:10. > :26:15.Four parts. If the snuff was taken away would anybody noticed today?
:26:16. > :26:19.There are a few MPs including a Tory minister who goes to the principal
:26:20. > :26:31.doorkeeper and says get the snuff box out. He says it keeps him awake
:26:32. > :26:35.for Jeremy Corbyn's questions. Is it good for you? It's not terribly good
:26:36. > :26:44.for you but that is what if you take what the principal doorkeeper called
:26:45. > :26:50.weapons grade snuff in every couple of hours, that would not be a good
:26:51. > :26:56.idea. So it's down to one or two, that's the democratic choice. That's
:26:57. > :27:05.right, a box of snuff lasts for two years. Doesn't go bad? Now it's very
:27:06. > :27:09.finely milled. Have you tried it? Yes, I was making this film. Just as
:27:10. > :27:19.well you're not making a about Colombia! What you make in general
:27:20. > :27:22.of not wearing a tie, talk about constituency names, snuff boxes, is
:27:23. > :27:29.it right Parliament should move with the times or should we still keep
:27:30. > :27:32.things that do no harm in our British tradition? I'm a bit
:27:33. > :27:37.schizophrenic about it, I love going to the House of Commons and walking
:27:38. > :27:39.through Westminster hall and going back to the time of William the
:27:40. > :27:51.Conqueror, you get that feeling but some of it is daft. It passed.
:27:52. > :27:55.Snuff? Snuff is harmless. And not too expensive. But there are other
:27:56. > :28:00.things in terms of whether an MP should call each other by their name
:28:01. > :28:05.you know? Everything has to go through the chair of the house so
:28:06. > :28:09.when you say you you are talking to the speaker. That was meant to make
:28:10. > :28:14.it more civilised discourse rather than to say you, what do you make of
:28:15. > :28:18.it, should we keep these things, good for tourists and tradition or
:28:19. > :28:22.should we become thoroughly modern? I think keep some of them but I
:28:23. > :28:28.think some of them are getting a bit and don't enhance the prestige of
:28:29. > :28:32.the House of Commons and look a bit daft. When you think to the start of
:28:33. > :28:38.the days preceding, though bag your seat you have to put down your prey
:28:39. > :28:42.card. We are definitely no role for modernisation for good or ill.
:28:43. > :29:02.The 1pm news is starting now. I will be back with this week.
:29:03. > :29:09.MUSIC: Hoppipolla by Sigur Ros