12/07/2011 Newsnight

The phone hacking scandal appears to have sunk Murdoch mur's attempt

to takeover BSkyB television. The man who once had politicians dance

to his tune, now finds them united in opposition. Even the leadership

of his own News Corp is now in question. As politicians of all

parties turn on the family and its Lieutenant, are the Murdochs facing

both internal revolt and external. News International was involved in

hiring people to get this information. The people they work

with are criminals, known criminal, criminals with records. Senior

police officers too feel the heat. Did you receive payment from any

news organisation? Gooden, absolutely not, I can't believe you

suggested that. We're joined by a former Conservative Party chairman

a former newspaper editor, and you know who.

Also tonight, the slow motion car crash of the eurozone debt crisis,

can Europe's gathered finance ministers wriggle out of the latest

mess. In Northern Ireland, why is there rioting in a society now

The phone hacking scandal is like a match dropped into a box of

firework, no-one knows what is going to explode next. Today the

former Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, accused another News International

title, the Sunday Times, of using known criminals to invade his

privacy. Policemen did their best to explain why their investigation

had been so useless. Tonight the leaders of the three main parties

have been holding talk about what sort of inquiry should be held. We

have the latest. What has been happening tonight? David Cameron

has been talking to Ed Miliband, Nick Clegg and also to Paul

Stevenson, the Metropolitan Police commissioner. They are pretty close,

the parties, to agreement, on the inquiry. I say inquiry, because it

now looks like there aren't going to be two inquiries, but

effectively there will be one. This will be announced in a statement to

be given by the Prime Minister to the Commons after Prime Minister's

Questions tomorrow. Initially David Cameron was talking about a

judicial-led inquiry to look into the News of the World case what

specifically went on there, and a second non-judicial inquiry into

media practices and ethics. Now effectively it looks like the media

practice and ethics part of it will be a sub-committee of the judicial

inquiry. It is quite likely tomorrow that we will hear which

judge has been appointed to do the job. Equally important, it looks

like Labour and the Liberal Democrats have persuaded David

Cameron to widen the terms of this inquiry, the judicial inquiry, so

that it will be looking into not just what went on in the news news,

but relations between the press and the police in general, and also

relations between politicians and the press in general. L as I

understand it, it is intended - also, as I understand it, it will

mean politicians and newspaper editors will have to come along and

give testimony under oath. This means that parliamentary debate

tomorrow will be something of a damp squib, isn't it? Well, it is n

way. Because the parties have agreed that they will support

Labour's opposition motion, which is that this House believes it is

in the public interest for Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation to

withdraw their bid for BSkyB. The Liberal Democrats announced they

can go along with that, and so too has the Government now. There is

some question as to whether there will actually be a vote tomorrow.

If nobody opposed that, then the Speaker asks for aclammation, and

if nobody - acclaimation and if nobody says anything then it is

passed. It would be a good idea to have a formal vote, so you not only

have a list of name there is, but also if the vote was 528-2, that

would be a more powerful message to News Corporation, than simply by

acclaimation. It would be interesting to know who the two

were. What about Gordon Brown's intervention today, this was quite

new, wasn't it? Yes, we heard last night about a number of activities

that other newspapers, beyond News of the World, the Sun and the

Sunday Times h allegedly been doing in relation - had allegedly been

doing in relation to Gordon Brown in particular. The story the Sun

broke about his son Fraser having cystic fibrosis, which they broke a

few months after his son Fraser was born. This is Gordon Brown's

reaction in an interview by the BBC. REPORTER: How did that affect you

as a father? In tears. Your son is now going to be broadcast across

the media. Sarah and I incredibly upset about it, we are thinking

about his long-term future, we are thinking about our family, but

there is nothing you can do about it. I find it quite incredible that

supposedly reputable organisations made their money, produced its

commercial results at the expense of ordinary people, by using known

criminals, that is now what has to be investigated. With us now is the

spokesman for the Hacked Off campaign, Hugh Grant, executive

editor of the Times and Lord Fowler who used to head the communications

committee. Your organisation is seeing David Cameron tomorrow, what

are you asking him for? We were worried, given that it was only two

or three weeks ago that David Cameron was sipping Pimm's on

Rupert Murdoch's lawn, we were worried in case we can really trust

him to have done a permanent turn about in the way he seems to have

done. We were worried particularly given the Culture Secretary's

statement in the House the other day, on the proposed terms of the

inquiry, that it looked a bit feeble. It looked like maybe

Cameron's choice was to sort of slightly push the whole thing into

the long grass and not do a proper inquiry. The Hacked Off group,

which includes lawyers and journalists and so on created a set

of terms that we thought the inquiry should include, they are

published in the Guardian tomorrow and they are on-line now. We have

been going around asking the leader of the opposition and Nick Clegg.

They are on board. The next stop is Cameron. It sounds from what we

heard just now he's on board now. The meet something rather

unnecessary? It is rather unnecessary me being here if that

is true. You guys want, the inquiry under a judge? One. And you say

that should happen at the same time as any police inquiry? Because we

only heard today from Aikers this could take years an inquiry.

judge could require them to take evidence under oath and they would

be required to incriminate themselves? We are told by top

lawyers you can circumnavigate that if you are a decent judge and you

can get the inquiry going on under all kinds of basis before calling

in people who might or might not incriminate themselves. What about

this inquiry? I think it would be good to look at the way newspapers

have operated, obviously things have gone on that are wrong, a lot

of people have been punished and a newspaper has been closed, which is

a great sadness in my view. Some of the mud is sticking to the

reputation of the British press and British journalists and journalism,

which I think is the best in the world, it is fierce and robust.

Clearly there is an inquiry, it has been set up, I fear for the future

of regulation, I fear we will move into a much more state-controlled

organisation looking at the press. I think this will be bad for the

freedom of the press and for journalism. Why are you shaking

your head? I just think that's rubbish that last part. I have been

pressing for an inquiry into this since February. I'm delighted that

we are having one. I think there are a whole range of areas you can

go into, without in any way interfering with the criminal

process. The Press Complaints Commission, to say, you don't

necessarily have to have a statutory commission, but I think

no-one would argue, I think, for a moment, that the Press Complaints

Commission come out of this smelling of roses. They haven't

been able to actually. I would, I was on it for a long time. I'm not

sure that is the best defence if you don't mind me saying so

personally! It hasn't exposed what has taken place there. Now, that

may be because it didn't have the power, or maybe it didn't have the

will, but we need to actually have a look at those sorts of things.

That can take place without interfering in any way. Plus we

could start to look at one of the things, we were so keen at Hacked

Off was within the remit of the inquiry, which is the politicians'

relationship with the media. Which has started to look very smelly to

the public. How frightened are politicians of News International.

You will never get an answer to that in an inairy. Somebody will

say they were scared of - an inquiry, somebody will say they

were scared. And was there any nobbling of a politician, to what

extent. Why otherwise were both main parties utterly cosied up to

Murdoch for so long if there wasn't an element of fear? They weren't

utterly cosied up, political leaders talk to major businessmen,

there is nothing wrong with that at all. I think Hugh Grant is right, I

was chairman of a political party, I do know this, although I have to

say under John Major we weren't very successful in cosying up to

anyone. Were you ever scared? what? Of being expoded by a

newspaper for something, did you ever - exposed by a newspaper for

something, did you ever feel beholden to a newspaper? No, I'm

not very good at this. This looks like the political class trying to

get a bit of revengs for the whole stuff over MPs' expenses and

bringing the press to heel so they don't ask awkward inquiries? That

is not my view. I think the healthy thing that should come out of all

this, Roger might agree with this, is you get some clear water between

the political parties on one side and the media on the other. What

has gone wrong with this relationship is this cosying up

with the relationship. Tony Blair going over to Australia to speak to

executives of News International, you don't get that in ordinary

relationships. And the Christmas dinners with Rebekah Wade. Why

aren't they on the record? That was a private dinner, why shouldn't

people have a private dinner. stinks. He can have dinner what

with whoever he likes? Not if it is major corporation trying to take

over our biggest satellite broadcaster t stinks to high heaven,

with a huge criminal suspicion hanging over it, because the phone

hacking thing has been around for a long time. Would he have had dinner

with the chairman of BP if they criminal stuff hanging over them.

That sort of thing won't happen in future. What you will find is

political leaders and politicians generally will be very cautious

indeed, I hope in the same way that the media will also be very

cautious. If we can have a new start, as far as all that is

concerned, I think it is in everyone's interest. I think that

will happen. I think the natural position for journalists as an

outsider, you are observing, you're citising, and analysing and trying

- criticising and analysing and trying to find out what is going

wrong, you can't get too close. you have got too close. I remember

in the Sun in the 1992 election, it was the Sun that won it. It was

complete rubbish. Can I just say one tiny thing about, that the Sun

headline about the last one in turn the lights out. That wasn't telling

people to not vote for Neil Kinnock, it was recognised and if people

voted for Neil Kinnock they would be bonkers, and nobody did vote for

him. If I was Neil Kinnock I might not take that rosy view. The press

follow and adapt and adjust, they don't govern people. I think

politicians have faken it far too much that it is the press that can

actually influence the outcome of elections. Is this just about the

murd mur press or is it wider than that? - Murdoch press or is it

wider? It is wider, we all know, that we will gradually learn how

much wider it was. Hopefully under this inquiry. Good investigative

journalism such as the Guardian and the Independent have done brilliant,

more and more will come out. I think there will be civil cases

coming out, I speak from very close experience.

I think the extraordinary thing in one way, is it has suddenly come

out now. If you go back to 2006, you had the Information

Commissioner putting much of this evidence into the public domain

then, and absolutely nothing was done about it. That wasn't about

phone hacking but breaches of the data act. It was about bribing.

was the whole culture, you have private detective, you have the

press, you have all the issues which are coming up in phone

hacking, what was done then? Nothing. Did parts of the press

take that as a green light for going on and doing things, I think

they probably did. I think unquestionable parts of the press

used private investigators far too much, and they became lazy and

didn't find it out for themselves, it has come to an end. It is more

than lazy it is illegal. Only the other day the Sun published my

medical records, when I tried to sue them, you tried to do it with

good humour, I say let's not go to a big legal cautious give me �5,000

for a charity. They thought they were entirely within my rights to

steal my medical rights and put them in their paper. When people

say it is a thing of the past, it is bollocks. Nobody would condone

that, it is truly bad behaviour and these things will start to fade and

go. The big campaigns of the past, you take Harry Evan, Sunday Times,

thalidomide. We have just had a huge campaign of trying to change

the nature of abortion, adoption, I apologise. With respect, I don't

think it is quite the same. We have led the campaign against the

stoning of the women in Iraq. is one thing, what you are not

doing is you are not investigating in the way the Sunday Times, in

those days, investigated thalidomide, my point is that they

never did this with phone hacking, they did it by patient digging, and

that you could say the same about what happened in Washington as well.

That's where the whole thing has changed. The press have used short

cuts and illegal short cuts and not actually to do things of public

interest. To find out who Ryan Giggs is having sex with, who cares.

Ifrpblgt say you found out about arms smuggling or a child sex

racket, would that be OK, what about the WikiLeaks, that is stolen

document. The end, does that become a legitimising thing. I'm asking,

we are in an unknown world there. It is not that unknown, if it is

illegal it is illegal, it is against the law. What is the public

interest? The public interest is that the law should be upheld, if

the press can't see that then I mean, frankly, it shouldn't just be

the News of the World. There was a public interest in expenses and

this was questionably highly legal at times? I don't think there have

been any prosecution ones that one, we have all agreed, I think, and I

don't disagree there are lines, difficult lines, what isn't

difficult is to actually condemn phone hacking and condemn the sort

of thing that happened to Hugh Grant and a whole range of other

people. Thank you all very much. Quite apart from what happens to Mr

Murdoch's plans, there is the minor matter of how to salvage what's

left of the reputation of the Metropolitan Police. Senior

officers were called before House of Commons select committee today

to explain how they had so comprehensively failed to carry

through a proper investigation into apparent evidence that nearly 4,000

people were hacked. The word "unimpressed" doesn't quite catch

the measure of the MPs' disbelief. We have spent the day watching the

detectives. They had bags of evidence,

literally, bin bag, brimming with names and dates. It is just that

no-one seemed to have much of what to do with it. The Met's finest

hour, it certainly wasn't it? sounds like Cluso, rather than

Columbo. Why did this investigation go so badly wrong? It was only

triggered in the first place because of fears, founded fears, as

it turned out b royal phones being hacked. It was led, therefore, by

anti-terror police. Frankly, they weren't interested in lesser

victims, nor were they interested in cleaning up dodgy press

practices. Another reason we learned today was about News

International, they had, according to detective, willfully obstructed

the investigation and lied to police. If at any time News

International had offered some meaningful co-operation instead of

prevarcation and what we now know to be lies, we would not be here

today. Former Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Peter Clarke, was in

charge of the day-to-day running of the original investigation? I know

it sounds a slightly banal point, that would you expect criminals to

co-operate with the police, of course you don't, this is slight

low different, I don't mean to be flipant here from someone taking

the lead off the church roof, this is a global organisation with

access to the best legal advice n my view deliberately trying to

thwart a criminal investigation. Was there, MPs wanted to know a

more sinister reason the investigation failed. Former

Assistant Commissioner, David Haye was in overall charge at the time.

During the investigation he was a dinner guest of...News

International. You have made a judgment call to accept hospitality,

from people who you are investigating for criminal offences,

that is correct isn't it Yeah. why didn't he decide, you know, not

to go to dinner? Not to have that dinner, I think, would have been

potentially more suspicious than to have it. Suspicious? Well, I don't

know why you're laughing...Just months after retiring as a

policeman, Mr Hayman went to work for...News International? How vu

any idea how this looks to the public.

(inaudible) I take that on the chin. The atmosphere quickly went from

incredulity to hostility. Did you ever receive payment from any news

organisation? Gooden, absolutely not, I can't believe you suggested

that. Lots of people did. Come on, hang on, I'm not letting you get

away with that. At the conclusion of the first

investigation, the News of the World's Academie Royale des Beaux-

Arts editor, Clive Goodman, and the private investigator, Paul McMullan,

pleaded guilty and were jailed. Everyone knew phone hacking went

further than royalty, people in sport, entertainment and politics,

the police had 11,000 pages of Paul McMullan's notebook, containing

thousands of names. When more allegations of the scale of phone

hacking came to light in 2009, the Met Commissioner ordered John Yates

to look into. It he spent a few hours looking into it, concluding

everything was fine. I consider no further investigation is required

after further looking into it. Yates, still a senior serving Met

officer admitted he got this one wrong. Had I known in July 2009

what I now know, I would have made different decisions. I express

clearly and publicly my impact on those affected as a result. Time

and time again the committee wanted to know why, when Assistant

Commissioner Yates said he looked at the evidence, didn't he actually

look at the evidence? At the end of the session the chairman gave the

officer this rebuke. I think your evidence today is unconvincing and

there are more questions to be asked about what happened when you

conducted this review. The final witness today was Deputy

Assistant Commissioner sue Akers, she is now leading the

investigation into all that evidence. She has confirmed there

are 3,800 potential victims, she told the committee she intends to

get answers. I'm confident we have an excellent team, who are working

tirelessly to get this right. I hope that I don't have to come back

here in five years time to explain why we have failed. That is a

potential date to pencil in, by July 2016, we might just have got

to the bottom of all of this. I'm joined now by Peter Neru, who

was, until last year, the head of the national police improvement

agency and before that spent four years as Chief Constable of Thames

Valley Police. What was the worst moment in the testimony for you

today? I think the worst moment was the incoherence of the decisions in

the early stages. Let's take Andy Hayman, a very senior police

officer, did you know he wanted to be a journalist? It was news to me.

Were you impressed by his testimony? Not wholly. I think the

big problem that came out there for Andy Hayman was the public

perception around the job he had moved into, so shortly after

leaving the force. What is the feeling within the force about how

he behaved? I think there is a general feeling about colleagues

who go and then decide to comment on colleagues, without objectivity.

He suffers from that, I think. about the various excuse that is

were given for the fact that 11,000 pages of evidence were not examined.

While I can understand the argument about priorities, but the claim,

for example, from Mr Yates, that it would have taken five or six

officers, four or five months to go through it, is that plausible?

feels a little bit long. How long would it have taken you? Go back

into the evidence there were some important points made by Lord Blair

at the beginning, and then by Peter Clarke, which was the coincidence

of other events. I ran a large force, but nothing like the

pressure of the type of events that they were dealing with. We all

understand that the London bombings took priority over absolutely

everything. But the allegation that it would take five or six officers

four or five months, or four or five officers five or six months s

that plausible? That feels a bit excessive. I would have spent

someone to form a careful triage, it wouldn't have taken that long to

work out the quantum you have. do we make of the suggestion that

senior officers of him don't do binbags s there a level in the

force where you don't investigate any more? I dealt with the

investigation into the investigation of the death of Dr

David Kelly, I didn't read all the material, but I satisfied myself on

all the lines of inquiry. It is the line between there. You can't do it

all, you are overseeing the whole of the inquiry. I do have some

sympathy with that approach. wouldn't take long to skim and say

this is worth investigating? would have expected a good summary

of what was there. It took about eight hours is that long enough?

it is 1,000 pages that feels short. I would have expected a good

summary. What has this done to public confidence in the police?

Not a lot. I think if you follow it through, and I can see the way that

the evidence was set out f you follow it through on the basis of

it was busy when they did it, they were focused on doing the royalty

issues, the ones that were really staring them in the face, I'm

troubled there wasn't a fresh attempt to look back at it. People

were failed, there are 3,800 people whose phones were hacked, and most

of them haven't the faintist idea, their numbers were there? The Met

are admitting they dropped the ball. There was failure, conspicuous

failure here? I wouldn't have been happy with that investigation,

personally, no. Do you think people should be sacked for it? That's

where I have trouble with what's going on with Labour MPs calling

for John Yates to resign without a proper inquiry being conduct. That

is premature, and I think John felt that was unfair at this stage. Not

least of which he was one of a number of people with oversight of

it, and he is a superb investigator. It was only months that the press

was laweding him for the investigation into the payments for

honours, that was a difficult political investigation.

Tomorrow we will be having an invited audience live in the studio

to see how the scandal has changed the way the rest of the country now

sees the British press. We had to stop dithering, you can have

blackouts or investment, which do you want, was the Energy

Secretary's pitch today as he set out his plans for the electricity

market. As anyone who has had to pay for an electricity bill

recently, the cost is spiralling. If you were hoping for comfort,

forget it, the Government's policy is for it to cost more. Demand will

carry on rising, and the lights will start going out. More money

for nuclear and carbon capture and renewable energy, which in turn

means higher bills. The estimate is that we need �200

billion more investment by 2020 for new renewable energy, power

stations, including new nuclear power stations, and an updated grid.

But for consumers it will mean higher bills, potentially hundreds

of pounds a year higher. The Government says the increase in

average bills will be limited to �160 a year by 2030, but that is on

top of the rises that are already happening. Only last week the UK's

biggest energy company, Centrica, put up its gas prices by 18% and

its electricity prices by 16%. Scottish Power has also announced

price increases of 19% for gas, and 10% for electricity. With us now is

the Energy Secretary, Chris Huhne, don't you think people are paying

enough for electricity? Yes I do. Why are we paying more? We don't

want to pay more. The key thing is to insure ourselves against the

volitility that we have seen on international oil and gas markets.

We have Libya, we have a big 30% increase in world gas prices, that

is what is hitting us. They will pay more, as a consequence of your

policy they will pay more? No. will not? Ifth depends on if we go

on reliant on gas markets, we will be buffeted. If we go own to low

carbon sources, like renewables and nuclear, we will have much less

impact on the domestic economy and prices. It is an insurance policy.

People will pay more than they are now? It is inevitable, if we have

more investment, we have to have replace a quarter of our capacity,

tes inevitable to pay more. have just referred to nuclear. Your

manifesto said last year you would reject new nuclear power station,

saying it is a far more expensive way of producing power than

promoting green energy? We are doing, by the way, conservation of

energy, we are doing a lot of energy saving, it is a key part of

the energy bill. But you are not reject Agnew generation of nuclear

power station, you were - rejecting a new generation of nuclear power

stations? We accepted it as a compromise. It is like tuition fee,

you say one thing and do something else? We had to reach agreement on

these issues to make sure we have a proper energy policy to get it into

place. Is there anything in your next manifesto we should believe,

on nuclear power you stood on your head and tu accident fees? The four

- - and student fees? The four key things on our manifesto we stand on.

Kindly tell us which ones to believe next time? You have to work

out what will be the other party and what they will say. In tax

fairness we have taken 1.1 million people out of tax in our manifesto.

That was a key priority. Pupil premium that was a key priority for

us. What you said before the election, it is extraordinary the

leader, David Cameron, who wants to be Prime Minister, ememploys Andy

Coulson. You were right there, weren't you? Well, the Prime

Minister has clearly reached an accommodation on that issue, we

know perfectly well what happened, Andy Coulson resigned. The News

International inquiry continues and the police have started seriously

inquiring into the activities. was bad judgment on the Prime

Minister's part? It is up to the Prime Minister whom he employs as

director of communications, it was clear what I said at the time.

you support him? I warned Nick, it was clear at the time, Nick indeed

warned the Prime Minister, it was very clear, as a result of that,

this was a decision that the Prime Minister took on his own account.

But you say that he was a man who was at best responsible for a

newspaper that was out of control, and at worst was personally

implicated in criminal activity. Do you admire the judgment of a leader

who can make thater sort of decision to appoint someone like

that? I think it is perfectly commendable to offer someone a

second chance, but I standby the judgment I made about Andy Coulson,

given what I knew at the time about what was going on at News

International, and given what we have subsequently found out. Let's

talk about Rupert Murdoch, do you think there is any role for him in

the media in this country? There are increasing problems, the more

we see with News International, the problems that were clearly there at

the News of the World, seemed to be spreading to the Sun, maybe seen

the Sunday Times, Gordon Brown's evidence today. The more this looks

like an organisation that will be very hard to find a fit and proper

organisation to be the major shareholder of a broadcasting

organisation like BSkyB. You have had your own problems with the

Sunday Times, you are a former journalist, do you not worry about

the inhibition that will be placed upon proper free report anything

this country if some of these restrictions get their way? There

shouldn't be restrictions. We do need a clear means of increasing

the standards of journalism, and of making sure there is a proper

complaints procedure. That is what we don't have with the Press

Complaints Commission. I think there is a long way to go. Making

sure that people are held individually to account, making

sure there is due prominence to corrections, making sure for

example that newspapers have to pay fine, on a self-regulating basis,

but I entirely agree, I don't think we should chill investigative

efforts of newspapers, freedom of the press is absolutely essential.

Guess what, there's another crisis or the makings of a crisis in the

eurozone this time it is not one of the smaller economies like Greece

or Ireland, although their bonds were downgrade today junk today. It

is Italy, the third-biggest in the entire eurozone, the potential

consequences if the Italians can't pay their enormous bills, are so

serious, that today stock markets across Europe dropped for the third

consecutive session. Our man with the cold eye is Paul Mason. What is

up? Italy's problems started, because anything that looks like

Greece, with Greece hovering on the point of default, gets investors

worried. Italy is trying to put together an austerity package, some

think it isn't that well designed, they are having it true to get it

through. And Mr Beryl's Last Year chose this moment to ring up a

national newspaper and say this about the Finance Minister, "you

know he thinks he's a genius, and everyone else is stupid, I put up

with him because I have known him so long ". To the bond markets this

began to sound a little bit like Greece. Economists had thought it

was Spain in the firing line next, when the Euro-took off in 2010 so,

did Spain's borrowing, this is the graph showing what it cost Spain to

borrow and Germany, Italy bubbled under, with Mr Berlussconi's

intervention and continued indedecision in the eurozone, it

has shot up close to Spanish levels, too high. That indecision continued

today. Finance ministers from the eurozone broke up, yet again,

without any concrete answers to the question, how much of Greece's debt

should be written off, and who should lose money. By sitting on

Greece and letting that fester, they have undermined investor

confidence and it has seeped into other countries, particularly on

the coast of Italy, Italy, if you like is the consequence of not

dealing with Greece. Why should we worry about this? Italy's debt is

120% of its GDP, the second-biggest debt in the eurozone. Unusually

that is mainly owned by Italians, not the big foreign investor,

Italian banks and people. It is the third biggest bond market in the

world, after the Americans and Japanese, if it goes it goes big

time. We can't bail it out. There is the politics. The Italian

opposition told me today they are prepared, unlike Greece, to vote

for the austerity, but their price will be national Government and

goodbye to Berlussconi. As the opposition party we offered today

to the majority the possibility to approve immediately, just in four

days, the financial adjustment for 40 billion euros, the day after we

say we want the resignation of the Government, and we want to have a

new Government with a big majority, without Mr Berl sconey as leader.

There are fresh reports of violence in Northern Ireland tonight. 20

police officers were injured last night, as Protestant testants

marched in celebration of King Billy's win at the Battle of the

Boyne some 300 years ago. There is worries that there is a resurgence

of paramilitary activity. Northern Ireland is at peace, what is going

Everyone agrees they were the worst nights of rioting seen in Northern

Ireland for many years. What caused this eruption of Protestant testant

fury in east Belfast is hard Tory pin down.

When it kicks off it is always the Catholics that start it, so it is.

I don't know how it could be resolved, to be honest, there has

been that much anger between Protestant testants and Catholics.

(gun shots) The area that came under attack is a so-called

interface, where long into the peace process, Catholic and

Protestant testant homes still have to be separated by high walls. Just

show me some of the photographs. On the loyalist side community workers

use workers to assure me the violence came ol only after

provocation from the Catholic Short Strand. Residents have collected in

their gardens, bolts, rocks. They could hit you on the head. This all

happened in the last few months? would say over the last six to

seven months there has been a lot of attacks in the homes around the

interface areas. But I'm told of another reason? There is so much

hatred between the two communities, it is never going to end. Why not?

It is just wait people are brought up. Retaliating, we will not stand

and watch it. This youth took part in the riots, he wanted to remain

anonymous? I don't know what happened, a lot of youngsters went

down and helped out. That is what I call it, I call it helping out.

What did you do to help out? Just throw a couple of missiles, bricks,

bottles, anything you can get a hold of, throw them over. Does the

peace process mean anything to you? I don't really understand all that

peace process stuff, so I don't. It is not working, as you can see.

These teenagers have a different outlook, at the even have Catholic

friend, and yet they don't feel able to see them. I talk to them

and stuff, I could text them, but I would never see them. It is just

awkward, if someone sees you going down to the Strand or sees them

coming out of the strand you will get done in. In what way? Like if

somebody seen you walking down to the Strand and seeing you come out

again, do you know what I mean, they will ask what are you doing

going in there. They all feel progress is a long way off. I don't

think anything will make a difference, to be honest, I think

the problem has been there for that long it will always be there. Even

if action was taken, I don't think it will make a difference.

Jobs have become scarceer for the unionist working-classs that once

manned the shipyards, there is a festering view that Catholics have

left their loyalist neighbours in their wake. If you have ailation

and demonisation of one section of the community, it breeds bitterness

and violence. People will not invest, and it will be used by

unscrupulous people and manipulated by them. You are found to have

violence arising in the toxic sectarian atmosphere which is

Northern Ireland. And members of the biggest loyalist paramilitary

group, the UVF, are aused of exploiting it. Throughout the years

of the troubles, the murals reflected what was going on in the

estates, where the paramilitaries were concentrated. During the years

of peace they got more community minded. In east Belfast

commemorating the Titanic, built just a few streets away. But take a

look at this money, repainted just a few weeks ago. It didn't reflect

anything, it foretold the trouble we have seen on the streets. And

the message from loyalism seems to be what was said about the IRA once,

they haven't gone away, you know. And they don't seem interested in

politics. Brian Irvine failed to get elected as the loyalist

representative in the May elections. The main leadership of the UVF wish

to move on, they wish to leave the stage. But there are elements

within the UVF, I believe do not wish to do so. They have their own

agenda, and their own reasons for that. The intentions of the UVF mr

deeply, at a time when the Government says the threat to the

mainland from Northern Ireland terrorism has increased. Whether or

not loyalist paramilitaries orchestrated the street violence, a

lot of them were there. I have been told for several months there has

been concern about meetings between the most senior loyalist commanders,

many of them based here on the Shankill, they have been meeting,

not because of stones being thrown at Protestant testant homes, but

because of on going violence by ex- IRA dissidents, many of them based

here on the republican side, who don't support the peace process.

Based in the Catholic Falls Road, Sinn Fein has led the republican

community into Government with unionists. But some of their former

supporters are feeling increasingly short changed. More than 30

republicans are held at this jail, separated from ordinary prisoners,

they are engaged in had a bitter dispute over their conditions. One

of them, Colin ska Duffy, awaiting trial for murder of two offduty

police officers, is one of those on dirty protests. We would want

everybody to come out and support these prisoners, you don't have to

support the arms struggle to support what is going on in here.

They are not treated humanely. are humiliated, every time on a

visit, they are constantly submitted to strip-searches.

Prison Service says it is honouring an agreement to end the dispute,

the relatives don't agree and say their campaign is gaining support

among the wider republican community. It is a an emotive issue,

the prisoners, it always has been. It has been highk jaed before for

political gain. Family and friends there are people in the family and

friends group would be affiliated to political organisation, but they

will not try to capitalise on this at all politically. Are you saying

they could? What cause violence on the streets? Exploit the situation.

We could use the situation, the situation could be used as a way of

gathering support for republicanism, never mind prisoner, getting the

momentum going, that is not what this group is about, we don't want

to use the situation, we want to resolve it. We are there to support

the prisoners, to highlight what is going on within the jail, that is

our only remit. The dispute is bringing the different republican

factions together inside the prison. One of them has just been released

on bail. They are unified in the position that is they want help

with. They are now, in effect, unified in the way they are dealing

with it. What happens and transpires on the outside I suppose

is again for a matter for people's representative ones the outside.

Republican society the core base are steadfastly behind the

prisoners, it can do no harm. year's marching season, always a

time of division, has been more tense than ever. These were

Catholic youths rioting last night in west Belfast. 22 police officers

were injured. High in the hole wod hills, overlooking east Belfast -

Hollywood Hills, overlooking east Belfast, another world, the club of

Rory McIlroy, the golfing superstar, is still basking in his US Open

triumph. The junior membership is full, who cares it is pouring with

rain. I think when he won it showed what Northern Ireland could produce,

and not just producing fighting and rioting. Here everyone is peaceful

and nice, having friendly conversations with everyone around,

it just doesn't seem like that's happening. But we all know it is,

we just hope it gets better. This gin win upset here that the agonies

on the streets below are overshadowing a more progressive

Northern Ireland. As the street violence reminds us, this year more

forcefully than before, the peace process is leaving some people

behind. I just want to show you one front

page tomorrow, it is the Sun, which entirely rebuffs Gordon Brown's

allegation that they got into some how the Paper got into his son's

paper - medical records. They say they got it from another source. It

is 100 years today since the planet Neptune was discovered, that is one

Neptune year. We were going to end with pictures of the blue planet,