:00:00. > :00:12.Now on BBC News it's time for Hardtalk.
:00:13. > :00:19.Welcome to HARDtalk I am Stephen Sackur. No one expects the sickening
:00:20. > :00:22.suicide bomb attacks in Brussels to be the final operation mounted by
:00:23. > :00:28.the so-called Islamic State movement on European soil. The President of
:00:29. > :00:41.France as saying that Europe is now at war. So what are the most useful
:00:42. > :00:44.weapons at disposals. My guess is Dominic Grieve who is now the
:00:45. > :00:44.chairman of the UK Parliament of intelligence and Security committee.
:00:45. > :01:22.Can Europe be secure and free? Dominic Grieve, welcome to HARDtalk.
:01:23. > :01:28.Thank you. Europe seems to be in a very difficult place. Intensely
:01:29. > :01:34.aware of the threat posed by the Islamic State group, but seemingly
:01:35. > :01:37.unable to root it out. It is a real problem and I think we are
:01:38. > :01:43.collectively facing a serious crisis. We've seen it go on for some
:01:44. > :01:47.time. In the region around Europe, whether it is Russia or damage to
:01:48. > :01:51.the Middle East, is seriously disturbed and there are threats to
:01:52. > :01:55.peace. So there is no doubt that we need to work together in order to
:01:56. > :01:59.tackle those problems and we also have to accept that the problems of
:02:00. > :02:11.terrorism are not in your ball to simple solutions. -- mitigated by.
:02:12. > :02:17.We need to preserve our democratic values and make sure that nothing
:02:18. > :02:21.that we do under minds, because this is a value battle and we take
:02:22. > :02:26.sensible steps to protect ourselves and the best way of doing that, I
:02:27. > :02:30.have very little doubt, is by reinforcing the cooperation between
:02:31. > :02:34.different countries. I want to talk about a lot of the issues that you
:02:35. > :02:40.put together their, one by one, and want to start with the most simple
:02:41. > :02:45.stick one out of the way -- simplistic. You are allowed to see a
:02:46. > :02:53.lot more secret documentation and I want your assessment of just how
:02:54. > :02:58.little, in a sense, we know about the nature of the Islamic State and
:02:59. > :03:08.associated threats in this country and across Europe today. Clearly
:03:09. > :03:16.there are unknown unknowns. We don't know we don't know. But we have a
:03:17. > :03:21.picture of what is going on. Islamic State has been using its base as a
:03:22. > :03:27.place from which to foment terrorism. And they are doing that
:03:28. > :03:31.by radicalising or calling upon individuals living in Western
:03:32. > :03:37.societies in Western Europe to take action. So that is the point. We
:03:38. > :03:43.clearly know about these areas and the degree to which this so-called
:03:44. > :03:53.caliphate has established a presence in Syria and Iraq. And what we don't
:03:54. > :03:57.know, and the Belgians seem to be in -- unable to penetrate, is a network
:03:58. > :04:03.of activists, followers and supervises of these people inside
:04:04. > :04:09.Europe's eager cities and most important cities like Brussels and
:04:10. > :04:12.Paris. I do not have any specialist knowledge as to what is happening in
:04:13. > :04:17.Brussels. Looking at it from a United Kingdom angle I think that
:04:18. > :04:22.our security services are able to build up a picture of the extent of
:04:23. > :04:27.radicalisation and who might be a threat. But that is not to say that
:04:28. > :04:32.it can never be 100% picture. There is always the possibility of
:04:33. > :04:37.somebody slipping through the net and that could be here or Brussels.
:04:38. > :04:42.That is why I am a wary of being critical of other intelligence
:04:43. > :04:47.services in foreign countries. But that the more co-ordinated we are,
:04:48. > :04:50.the more we share information the more likely we will pick up threats
:04:51. > :04:56.before they translate into action. The Home Secretary here in the UK
:04:57. > :05:02.has said there is 14 plots that have happened on UK soil since the start
:05:03. > :05:07.of 2014. Thankfully they have been thwarted but that does suggest that
:05:08. > :05:11.there are is a significant number of people committed to extremist
:05:12. > :05:17.violence in our country. Can you put any number on that and give me a a
:05:18. > :05:20.sense of the scale that you were hearing? I did the guy can put a
:05:21. > :05:24.number on that. We're not talking about thousands of people. Only a
:05:25. > :05:33.very small number of people if they are statistically dedicated to this
:05:34. > :05:35.can cause mayhem. There are not thousands of people living in
:05:36. > :05:39.British society who wish to commit acts of violence against their
:05:40. > :05:43.fellow citizens. That is not to say that the numbers are tiny, they are
:05:44. > :05:49.not. Consistently suggestions by the police that we are talking of the
:05:50. > :05:53.high hundreds. And I've no reason to think that that is wrong. And
:05:54. > :05:56.clearly, that is not just the individuals who might be doing
:05:57. > :06:00.things but also the people who are immediately around them or have
:06:01. > :06:04.knowledge of what they are doing. We mustn't exaggerate the problem,
:06:05. > :06:10.either. The vast majority of Muslims living in the United Kingdom are
:06:11. > :06:13.entirely peaceful, desire to integrate an absolutely poor what is
:06:14. > :06:18.going on. That is an important point and the vast majority of refugees
:06:19. > :06:25.and migrants who are coming out of Syria are also seeking peace in
:06:26. > :06:29.their family. But there is an issue when one talks about the people
:06:30. > :06:39.coming out of Syria and whether in the midst of that flow of migrants
:06:40. > :06:44.they could also the extremist posing as dangerous. Poland have said they
:06:45. > :06:49.are not going to take any quota no longer prepared to take any of the
:06:50. > :06:55.searing refugees to be distributed through the European Union. Does
:06:56. > :07:00.that seem to you to be a sensible response? I'm not sure it
:07:01. > :07:04.necessarily ears because I don't think that the vast majority of
:07:05. > :07:22.refugees fleeing Syria have any evil intent towards the countries in
:07:23. > :07:28.which they are flaying -- fleeing. One of the bombers was able to
:07:29. > :07:30.travel through Europe and now we know that the Turkish born of one
:07:31. > :07:36.individual who came out of Syria, was picked up by the Turkish people
:07:37. > :07:40.and then went to Holland and Belgium and both government were warned by
:07:41. > :07:43.the Turkish that this man was a potential danger and they did
:07:44. > :07:49.nothing about it and he was involved in the bombing in Brussels. So I
:07:50. > :07:52.understand and that would appear to be a failure of intelligence sharing
:07:53. > :07:56.or acting on intelligence. It does not concern the United Kingdom so
:07:57. > :08:00.I've only seen what I've read in the media on that. But I think it is
:08:01. > :08:03.important to emphasise that the majority of people that we have had
:08:04. > :08:06.in this country have been self radicalising. That is to say they
:08:07. > :08:10.are second or third generation immigrants in this country, they've
:08:11. > :08:15.not come out of the flow from Syria. The point I'm trying to make
:08:16. > :08:18.that to saddle again into 1's head that we've stopped the flow from
:08:19. > :08:24.Syria and suddenly our problems are going to go away, I don't think that
:08:25. > :08:31.that is correct. As far as one can make out, the cells that have been
:08:32. > :08:34.active in France and Belgium appears to be individuals are Moroccan
:08:35. > :08:38.origin who have in fact been settled as families in Western Europe the
:08:39. > :08:43.sometime. That is not to say that some of them may have come from
:08:44. > :08:46.Syria. Bad is also possible. But it highlights the point that to get
:08:47. > :08:56.into 1's mind the idea that people fleeing Syria because many of them
:08:57. > :09:00.might be terrorists, there is no evidence to sustain that. Let us
:09:01. > :09:03.look around because early you made the point of saying that the vast
:09:04. > :09:08.majority of Muslims who live in communities in the United Kingdom,
:09:09. > :09:12.are again, peace loving people who are nothing but security for
:09:13. > :09:18.themselves and their family. Bart, the fact is, as you've just alluded
:09:19. > :09:23.to, when we have seen examples of terrorist activity, they've been
:09:24. > :09:37.extremist who found cover inside Muslim communities inside the United
:09:38. > :09:41.Kingdom. -- but. We made the point that as far as she was concerned,
:09:42. > :09:48.she do not consider that the Muslim community in United Kingdom were
:09:49. > :09:53.wanting in coming forward to provide information where they feared that
:09:54. > :09:57.people were involved with them. Said the French intelligence division has
:09:58. > :10:02.said that we are talking about gorilla terrorism here in Europe and
:10:03. > :10:15.we're talking about publishing that is complicit. -- so. They talk about
:10:16. > :10:19.structural invulnerability. It is abundantly clear that there are
:10:20. > :10:22.individuals in this country who wish us harm and I also entirely accept
:10:23. > :10:26.that around and there will be others who may be on the way to
:10:27. > :10:31.radicalisation or may just turn a blind eye or may have extreme
:10:32. > :10:37.views, who may in fact provide some the sustenance that surrounds these
:10:38. > :10:41.groups. But I think, in reality, rather a small number of people
:10:42. > :10:45.outside of that is the vast, broad swathe of Muslims living in the
:10:46. > :10:57.United Kingdom who are wholly removed from this. Is the onus upon
:10:58. > :11:02.them to engage more with the authorities to safeguard against the
:11:03. > :11:08.activities of this very small number of extremists? There is an onus on
:11:09. > :11:12.them and an onus on all of our. There is the wider issue of
:11:13. > :11:16.integration behind this. I'm currently chairing a commission says
:11:17. > :11:20.citizens UK on the participation to Muslims in the public life. We know
:11:21. > :11:25.there are difficulties in respect of this. And we know, and this is not
:11:26. > :11:31.just one way that they operate, they operate both ways. Integrating and
:11:32. > :11:40.the aggression of summer was an community is into the United Kingdom
:11:41. > :11:47.has undoubtedly proved challenging. -- integrating and integration. I'm
:11:48. > :11:51.thinking of Donald Trump and his approach is to forget about being
:11:52. > :11:54.politically correct any more and forget about this nonsense of
:11:55. > :11:59.treading on peoples toes and committed to full equality on
:12:00. > :12:03.everything, and he says for a start, were not going to let them travel
:12:04. > :12:08.from now on and we're going to be much, much tougher in the way of the
:12:09. > :12:12.deal with these communities. These are simplistic absurdities and they
:12:13. > :12:16.are extremely damaging and corrosive. They're going to do
:12:17. > :12:21.nothing to solving some of the longer term problems. Two things
:12:22. > :12:26.that need to be done is tackling the terrorists, in a sense and that if
:12:27. > :12:33.the government's prevent strategy. And also, to reinforce the values of
:12:34. > :12:36.what a liberal democratic and free society which is pluralistic and
:12:37. > :12:42.multicultural should be trying to achieve. Lots of people respond
:12:43. > :12:45.positively to that, but we as politicians, and this is right
:12:46. > :12:49.across the mainstream, undoubtedly there is a duty on asked to do
:12:50. > :12:52.more, and that I've always considered to be one of the most
:12:53. > :12:56.important things and priorities for us all. But us talk more about the
:12:57. > :12:59.European Union and in this conversation we made a point of
:13:00. > :13:03.differentiating between Britain and France and Belgium as we've been
:13:04. > :13:07.talking about. Do you think the European Union and its very security
:13:08. > :13:25.and intelligence agencies in hands or hinder the security of your? --
:13:26. > :13:28.enhance the security of Europe? They are talking about the Schengen
:13:29. > :13:35.arrangement which does not concern us directly and removing the border
:13:36. > :13:41.control. They're saying that there are no border controls. Whether they
:13:42. > :13:46.are wise to continue with that, in the face of the current level of
:13:47. > :13:50.terrorism is a debate to them. The former head of Interpol says that
:13:51. > :13:52.the Schengen and the freedom of movement that we have discussed,
:13:53. > :13:58.borderless travel, it is like hanging a sign welcoming terrorists
:13:59. > :14:02.into Europe. But the question you asked me is relating to our own
:14:03. > :14:07.security here. We are not affected by that directly because we're not
:14:08. > :14:10.part of Schengen. Clearly, if our partners wish to restore border
:14:11. > :14:18.controls, and indeed, some of them have, it looks as if it may well
:14:19. > :14:20.have to be modified. I entirely accept that if you don't have border
:14:21. > :14:25.controls and the ability to have terraced to move from France to
:14:26. > :14:28.Hungary and three Germany, there's got to be nothing that is there to
:14:29. > :14:32.pick up those movements. That is one of the reasons that the United
:14:33. > :14:35.Kingdom picked that up. If we no longer had these passports and it
:14:36. > :14:39.was quite clear that we were distinct territorial, completely
:14:40. > :14:44.distinct from the European Union. I find it difficult to see where the
:14:45. > :14:48.advantage would lie, at the moment, we can check passports of anybody
:14:49. > :14:53.coming into this country. The Home Secretary, even if it is in a
:14:54. > :14:55.European Union national can prevent someone coming in if she has
:14:56. > :14:59.credible evidence of that person may be involved in extremism or
:15:00. > :15:10.terrorism, and Dean to be a person who is not conducive to the public
:15:11. > :15:16.good. We can exclude such people. Ultimately, what Europe offers us is
:15:17. > :15:23.a cooperation mechanism through policing and the prosecutors. The
:15:24. > :15:32.former European chief says it is essentially wooed -- essentially
:15:33. > :15:37.useless. And those memo states are extremely weak.
:15:38. > :15:41.I certainly agree that some of the member states will have weak
:15:42. > :15:48.security, there are certainly countries without the tradition of
:15:49. > :15:52.having security. Are we going to share intelligence with them?
:15:53. > :15:55.Leakey: there he said. With some it would be difficult to share
:15:56. > :15:59.intelligence but by participating in the European structures, we can set
:16:00. > :16:03.out to try to improve their performance. But where I think Sir
:16:04. > :16:08.Richard may be wrong is that he retired from the intelligence world
:16:09. > :16:12.in 2004 and I do think that in the intervening period there have been
:16:13. > :16:16.quite a lot of progress in the respect of data and intelligence
:16:17. > :16:19.sharing and policing levels across the European Union. Really? You
:16:20. > :16:23.learn what happened between the Belgians and the French after the
:16:24. > :16:27.Bataclan and other attacks in November of last year. You know how
:16:28. > :16:30.poor the cooperation was. Why do you say that you are now confident this
:16:31. > :16:35.really works on a pan-European scale? I am saying it is better than
:16:36. > :16:40.not having it which is the point. The question you asked me is if we
:16:41. > :16:44.were better off out and the answer is, how would withdrawing from the
:16:45. > :16:50.European Union improve our national security? And I have to say I simply
:16:51. > :16:53.do not see. That is not to say that the European systems we operate
:16:54. > :16:56.under our perfect or could not do with improvement. We do a lot of
:16:57. > :17:01.intelligence sharing with our European partners, our key partners.
:17:02. > :17:04.We do a lot more with the English-speaking world, the
:17:05. > :17:09.so-called five eyes ultimate level of intelligence sharing for the UK
:17:10. > :17:12.government involves the United States, Canada .com Australia and
:17:13. > :17:19.New Zealand. That sends a very clear message about who we in the UK
:17:20. > :17:23.believe we can really trust. I think that is a slightly simplistic
:17:24. > :17:28.approach to the issue. There is no doubt that our five eyes partners
:17:29. > :17:32.are a long, trusted and very well ordered relationship. It is very
:17:33. > :17:37.important for our national security and for global security. But when it
:17:38. > :17:41.comes to the issue of how do we tackle terrorist cells which may be
:17:42. > :17:44.across the European Union, it is abundantly clear that our closest
:17:45. > :17:48.cooperation will be with those countries which are most directly
:17:49. > :17:54.affected and with those countries of the European area which can best
:17:55. > :17:58.provide us with assistance. I know on the whole you are a fan of
:17:59. > :18:04.European institutions. The Belgian Prime Minister now says it is time
:18:05. > :18:08.for European CIA, a truly integrated intelligence agency for the European
:18:09. > :18:12.Union. Would you go that far? I think that might prevent some
:18:13. > :18:17.problems in relation to what you share. So I don't necessarily think
:18:18. > :18:23.that is the solution. As I say, I certainly don't think that all is
:18:24. > :18:26.perfect. It isn't. But there are mechanisms for sharing policing
:18:27. > :18:29.information which is vital to our national security. The chief
:18:30. > :18:34.Commissioner of police for the Metropolis have said so, everything
:18:35. > :18:38.I know about this suggests it is of great importance and intelligence
:18:39. > :18:43.sharing is a rather different issue. That is often done on a bilateral
:18:44. > :18:47.level, I am sure. At the mechanisms within the European Union are
:18:48. > :18:51.helpful to our cooperation. For example, there is a committee that
:18:52. > :18:55.meets regularly with heads of internal security services including
:18:56. > :18:58.MI5. But it is telling that Britain is now intent on going further than
:18:59. > :19:04.the European Union appears to be ready to go, at least before the
:19:05. > :19:07.Brussels bombs, in terms of surveillance. Electronic mass
:19:08. > :19:11.surveillance. You have been intimately involved in this debate
:19:12. > :19:17.in the United Kingdom, about exactly how far the government should push
:19:18. > :19:20.its investigator he powers, legislation. Given the security
:19:21. > :19:24.situation we have talked about today, you believe the government
:19:25. > :19:27.has got the balance right with its insistence there must be sweeping
:19:28. > :19:31.new electronic surveillance powers? The committee of which I am a
:19:32. > :19:35.chairman was absolutely clear in its early report for the last election
:19:36. > :19:38.and its follow-up report that the powers that the government is
:19:39. > :19:43.seeking to set out in the legislation, the area as it wishes
:19:44. > :19:47.to cover, are necessary and proportionate to maintaining our
:19:48. > :19:51.national security. And it is wrong to think that what it is seeking to
:19:52. > :19:58.do is to provide an ability of general surveillance, of
:19:59. > :20:03.communications, to our agencies, in particular GCHQ. This is utterly
:20:04. > :20:08.removed from reality, it is not what GCHQ does or intends to do and if
:20:09. > :20:13.they were to do it... But they do store the records of ordinary people
:20:14. > :20:16.for up to a year? The question is about the capability of the agencies
:20:17. > :20:21.to be able to access important data if they need it. That is entirely
:20:22. > :20:24.different thing from carrying out mass surveillance the population
:20:25. > :20:29.because that is not what they are doing. But if the data is not
:20:30. > :20:33.available for them to look at an search, then they can't use it. What
:20:34. > :20:37.about Edward Snowden and everything he revealed about the extent of
:20:38. > :20:45.surveillance that the public will be: -- will be satisfied with this?
:20:46. > :20:49.You said not long ago given the background of this, the allegations
:20:50. > :20:54.made by Edward Snowden, you said it is surprising that the protection of
:20:55. > :20:56.people's privacy, enshrined in other legislation doesn't feature more
:20:57. > :21:01.prominently in this draft legislation. We certainly put
:21:02. > :21:05.forward our view that it would have been better to have an overarching
:21:06. > :21:09.privacy clause within the legislation. And will you still push
:21:10. > :21:13.for that? I very much hope that the government will respond positively
:21:14. > :21:16.to what we have suggested. As I said when I addressed the house in the
:21:17. > :21:19.second reading of this legislation when it first came before
:21:20. > :21:23.Parliament, one has got to be careful. Some of it may have a
:21:24. > :21:25.slightly symbolic aspect to it but I do think it overarching privacy
:21:26. > :21:29.clause in the view of the committee would be better dealt with in this
:21:30. > :21:33.legislation but that is an entirely different thing from saying that the
:21:34. > :21:39.legislation, in terms of the areas of power that the government wants
:21:40. > :21:43.to take, isn't needed. It is. And in the end what is really important is
:21:44. > :21:46.who decides when these powers can be assumed by the government. Now there
:21:47. > :21:51.has been a lot of debate about the extent of the judicial lock that is
:21:52. > :21:57.put upon these powers. Do you believe that now, the judiciary and
:21:58. > :22:02.the judicial authority is sufficient to ensure that ministers cannot ride
:22:03. > :22:06.roughshod over privacy? The shift that has put forward about having a
:22:07. > :22:10.double lock mechanism over the majority of these powers is a very
:22:11. > :22:13.significant change and it does give me great confidence that the ability
:22:14. > :22:18.of a judge to review the ministerial decision of granting a war and
:22:19. > :22:23.provides extremely important safeguard to these powers being
:22:24. > :22:26.abused. We pressed this very... I personally pressed this very hard
:22:27. > :22:30.and I'm very pleased to see it in legislation. Isn't there something
:22:31. > :22:34.missing from all of this debate about how Europe's best response to
:22:35. > :22:41.the security threat by jihadi extremists? In the end, as long as
:22:42. > :22:44.there is this war in Syria, as long as the Jihadis are making new
:22:45. > :22:49.inroads in countries like Libya, there is no way that we can
:22:50. > :22:56.extinguish the threat in Europe, that is the truth isn't it? Guess it
:22:57. > :23:00.is. We don't have 100% security. Nor do we have a coherent policy in
:23:01. > :23:04.Syria or Libya. There is no doubt that there are issues over what
:23:05. > :23:10.Western policy may be in Syria or Libya. Idlib yeah we recently signed
:23:11. > :23:15.up to providing much greater help to the new government, the new national
:23:16. > :23:19.government, which is recognise by the United Nations. I am very
:23:20. > :23:25.pleased to see that. And in Syria, there is a strategy but I have to
:23:26. > :23:28.say it is one that has proved very challenging to implement partly
:23:29. > :23:31.because of the attitude of Russia and the vote that took place in the
:23:32. > :23:33.House of Parliament over whether we should take any military action to
:23:34. > :23:38.restrain the worst excesses of Bashar al-Assad were undertaken step
:23:39. > :23:42.that we are where we are and I have to say I do worry. I look at the
:23:43. > :23:46.state of the Middle East and the anxiety is that if you deal with one
:23:47. > :23:50.problem, another is going to surface. The Middle East is in a
:23:51. > :23:54.state of severe chaos. There are some countries that are surviving,
:23:55. > :23:58.many of them are descending into a very dark place and that is going to
:23:59. > :24:03.present challenges for us. We are on their doorstep. So when Francois
:24:04. > :24:10.Hollande said this was a war that had no end, do you agree? History
:24:11. > :24:12.shows that periods of great disturbance of this kind will come
:24:13. > :24:16.to an end eventually but I don't think they will come to an end
:24:17. > :24:26.quickly. Dominic Grieve, we have to and write there but thank you for
:24:27. > :24:32.being on HARDtalk -- we have to end right there.