:00:09. > :00:13.Tonight, the Prime Minister tries to take the steam out of the
:00:13. > :00:20.hacking scandal, spending hours in the Commons listening to MPs, and
:00:20. > :00:25.finally using the "S" word, sorry. With 20/20 hindsight and all that
:00:25. > :00:27.has followed, I would not have offered him the job. It is not
:00:27. > :00:31.about hindsight or whether Mr Coulson lied to him, it is about
:00:31. > :00:36.all the information and warnings that the Prime Minister ignored.
:00:36. > :00:39.have got the latest on Murdoch's former lawyers, and the private
:00:39. > :00:42.investigator at the heart of it all. The developments have been
:00:42. > :00:47.different from day-to-day, I have no further comment to take at this
:00:47. > :00:51.stage. However, this may change. The BSkyB deal off, the country's
:00:51. > :00:58.best-selling newspaper scrapped, the Murdochs in trouble, how this
:00:58. > :01:04.has changed the media in Britain. Who Two Taxing being better than -
:01:04. > :01:11.Two Maxs better than one, they go head tohead. Germany and France try
:01:11. > :01:17.again to fix the euro, is it fixable, the Shadow Chancellor
:01:17. > :01:22.himself is here to tell us whether the euro can be saved.
:01:22. > :01:32.Will the price tag mean that the high-speed railway will work.
:01:32. > :01:34.
:01:34. > :01:39.is the dream, build it and they Good evening, after own during
:01:39. > :01:41.frontal takes from the opposition, sniping in the media, and sometimes
:01:41. > :01:44.lukewarm support from Conservatives, the Prime Minister appeared in the
:01:44. > :01:48.Commons today to try to calm the storm over the hacking scandal.
:01:48. > :01:51.With the Commons now in recess it seems to have worked, at least for
:01:51. > :01:54.now, although there were continuing questions over Mr Cameron's
:01:54. > :02:01.judgment, his staff appointments, and his interest or otherwise in
:02:01. > :02:06.the Murdoch bid for BSkyB. Just yesterday the Prime Minister
:02:06. > :02:11.was in Lagos, part of an African tour cut short. His last event, a
:02:11. > :02:19.press conference with the Nigerian President, Goodluck Jonathan, that
:02:19. > :02:24.really is his name. A speedy return to a frenzied
:02:24. > :02:29.Westminster, no-one for now at least is calling him Goodluck
:02:29. > :02:34.Cameron. David Cameron has been playing a none too subtle game of
:02:35. > :02:39.grandmother's footsteps over Andy Coulson. Tiptoeing ever closer to a
:02:39. > :02:46.more condemnatery line. He still hasn't made the outright apology
:02:46. > :02:51.that the opposition are demanding, but today, he got closer than ever.
:02:51. > :02:55.If it turns out I have been lied to that would be a moment for a
:02:55. > :03:00.profound apology. And in that event I can tell you I will not fall
:03:00. > :03:04.short. Of course I regret, and I am extremely sorry about the furore it
:03:04. > :03:08.has caused, with 20/20 hindsight and all that has followed, I would
:03:08. > :03:14.not have offered him the job, and I expect that he wouldn't have taken
:03:14. > :03:20.it. But you don't make decisions in hindsight, you make them in the
:03:20. > :03:23.present. You live and you learn, and believe you me, I have learned.
:03:23. > :03:28.This should have been the first day of the parliamentary reserbs
:03:28. > :03:32.instead a statement, and a debate on, yes, hacking. The leader of the
:03:32. > :03:36.opposition, one suspect, would gladly do without any more
:03:36. > :03:41.parliamentary holidays ever again. Why doesn't he do more than give a
:03:41. > :03:46.half apology, and provide the full apology now for hiring Mr Coulson,
:03:46. > :03:50.and bringing him into the heart of Downing Street.
:03:50. > :03:55.Today the Prime Minister announced the names of the panel who, with
:03:55. > :04:00.Lord Justice Leveson, will inquiry into phone hacking. They are Shami
:04:00. > :04:03.Chakrabarti, the civil liberties campaigner and director of Liberty,
:04:03. > :04:11.Sir Paul Scott-Lee, former Chief Constable of the West Midlands
:04:11. > :04:16.Police. David Lord Currie. Elinor Goodman, former political editor of
:04:16. > :04:22.Channel 4 News, and the former political editor of the Telegraph,
:04:22. > :04:27.and Sir David Bell, former director of the Financial Times.
:04:27. > :04:31.As Rupert Murdoch's private jet was cleared for take off, one thing is
:04:31. > :04:35.absolutely clear, next time he lands in this country, he won't
:04:35. > :04:40.enjoy such easy access to top politicians. It is his previous
:04:40. > :04:44.meetings though that came under the most scrutiny in the Commons today.
:04:44. > :04:47.Last Friday he revealed that since taking office, he had met
:04:47. > :04:52.representatives of News International or News Corp,
:04:52. > :04:55.including Rebekah Brooks and James Murdoch, on 26 separate occasions.
:04:55. > :05:00.So 0 the first question, so the first question I have for the Prime
:05:00. > :05:08.Minister, is whether he can assure the House, that the BSkyB bid was
:05:08. > :05:12.not raised in any of those meetings, or in phone calls with those
:05:12. > :05:17.organisations. But although Mr Cameron addressed the subject marks
:05:17. > :05:23.he didn't specifically answer the question. He asked about the issue
:05:23. > :05:31.of BSkyB, the cabinet secretary has said there was no breach of the
:05:31. > :05:34.ministerial code. You heard the evidence of Rebekah Wade yesterday
:05:34. > :05:38.saying there was not one single inappropriate conversation. When it
:05:38. > :05:42.comes to setting out meetings with News Corporation, I have set out
:05:42. > :05:45.every single meeting since the last election. No, the Right Honourable
:05:45. > :05:51.gentleman published a list this morning, but it does not go back to
:05:51. > :05:59.the last election. Scenting perhaps a weakness a prosession of Labour
:05:59. > :06:04.MPs repeated the same question. Prime Minister, did he ever discuss
:06:04. > :06:09.the question of the BSkyB bid with News International at all the
:06:09. > :06:13.meetings they attended. I never had one inappropriate conversation.
:06:13. > :06:18.Backbenchers tried putting the question in more and more creative
:06:18. > :06:28.ways. Prime Minister, have you ever uttered the word BSkyB in the
:06:28. > :06:31.
:06:31. > :06:34.presence of Rebekah Brooks, Rupert Murdoch or James Murdoch? You know,
:06:34. > :06:37.(sighs) Over the past couple of weeks the press has been full of
:06:38. > :06:41.reports that Conservative MPs have not been too enthusiastic about
:06:41. > :06:49.lining up to support their Prime Minister. Today, though, they were
:06:49. > :06:53.certainly very keen. This might be an unpopular thing to saying, but
:06:53. > :06:57.outside the Westminster bubble, I suggest the nation has had its fill
:06:57. > :07:04.on the subject, it is actually getting fed up, it wants answers.
:07:04. > :07:11.There is an inquiry under way, that is where the answers will come.
:07:11. > :07:17.David Cameron's good luck today, though, was the last day of
:07:17. > :07:23.parliament. It is committees and such that has kept this stoked with
:07:23. > :07:26.fuel. A holiday is something the Prime Minister could do with.
:07:26. > :07:28.Richard Watson is here to talk us through some of the new
:07:28. > :07:33.developments tonight? Some interesting developments tonight.
:07:33. > :07:37.One of the most significant things is News International today stopped
:07:37. > :07:40.paying Glenn Mulcaire's legal fees, the private investigator at the
:07:40. > :07:43.heart of the scandal. Glenn Mulcaire himself was facing up
:07:43. > :07:48.wards of 30 civil case, he was arguing that he shouldn't have to
:07:48. > :07:54.give evidence in these because he might incriminate himself or any
:07:54. > :07:59.future legal proceedings. His legal costs would have been �500,000
:07:59. > :08:04.upwards. News International having pulled the rug from bankrolling his
:08:04. > :08:07.legal fees is significant. Is he going to talk now? As you can
:08:07. > :08:14.appreciate we are in the middle of a number of inquiries at the moment,
:08:14. > :08:18.it is a fluid and developing situation. Like I said, the
:08:18. > :08:21.developments have been different from day-to-day, I have no further
:08:21. > :08:26.comment to make at this stage. However, this may change. That's
:08:27. > :08:31.hanging in the air. Something from Harbottle & Lewis, the wonderfully
:08:31. > :08:35.named lawyers firm that used to work for News International? This
:08:35. > :08:38.is deeply significant, it is complex territory, so bear with me
:08:38. > :08:43.here. Back in 2007, News International appointed this firm
:08:43. > :08:48.of lawyers to look at the case of Clive Goodman because he was taking
:08:48. > :08:53.civil action against them. As part of that Harbottle & Lewis reviewed
:08:53. > :08:56.a dossier of evidence and e-mail, some of these related to e-mail
:08:56. > :08:59.traffic between Andy Coulson and the royal correspondent, talking
:08:59. > :09:02.about the purchase of a confidential dossier of phone
:09:02. > :09:05.numbers from the Royal Family. Now, Harbottle & Lewis were actually
:09:05. > :09:09.asked, we think, to specifically look at the question of phone
:09:09. > :09:12.hacking, was there any evidence of other people knowing about the
:09:12. > :09:15.phone hacking. On that very narrow point, they wrote to News
:09:15. > :09:21.International saying we don't find any evidence of specific evidence
:09:21. > :09:24.of other people knowing about phone hacking, that assurance was relied
:09:24. > :09:27.upon by News International for the best part of three years, and
:09:27. > :09:31.following the evidence to the select committee yesterday it is up
:09:31. > :09:35.for debate. This is absolutely crucial, when Lord McDonald, the
:09:35. > :09:38.former DPP was asked by News International earlier this year to
:09:38. > :09:42.review that dossier or part of it, a smaller part of the dossier, he
:09:42. > :09:46.said to the select committee, within minutes he found evidence of
:09:47. > :09:50.major criminality, for example, the attempted purchase of the
:09:50. > :09:52.confidential Royal Household phone numbers. Harbottle & Lewis have
:09:52. > :09:57.serious questions to answer about the nature of the advice they gave
:09:57. > :10:01.to News International. Why did they give that narrow advice, maybe that
:10:01. > :10:04.was what they were asked to do. The crucial difference tonight is up
:10:04. > :10:08.until now harsh have not been able to defend themselves, because News
:10:08. > :10:11.International said there was a duty of confidentialty. Tonight News
:10:11. > :10:18.International have lifted that, Harbottle & Lewis are now free to
:10:18. > :10:24.make their case to a select committee or the judicial review. I
:10:24. > :10:28.think this will be dleep significant. We're joined by
:10:28. > :10:31.Michael Fallon, and Ivan Lewis. Why did someone with the obvious
:10:31. > :10:35.skills of David Cameron allow himself to get into a position
:10:35. > :10:38.where some people saw this as a make or break moment for him?
:10:38. > :10:41.wasn't a make or break moment, David Cameron was one of the first
:10:41. > :10:46.to recognise that this had got beyond celebrities and politicians.
:10:46. > :10:49.This was a very serious issue that both parties had allowed to drift
:10:49. > :10:55.for years. This cosy relationship between politicians and the media,
:10:55. > :10:59.the fact the press wasn't being regulated properly. Two years ago,
:10:59. > :11:03.and he let it fester for the last two weeks? These allegations are
:11:03. > :11:06.five or six years old, he made the point, that not only did the Labour
:11:06. > :11:15.Government do nothing about it, but the Conservative opposition didn't
:11:15. > :11:18.ask for it as well. See he - he sees this as an opportunity, and a
:11:18. > :11:24.chance to recast the relationship between politicians and media, and
:11:24. > :11:28.to see what can be done about recruitment to the police at a high
:11:28. > :11:32.level. The Prime Minister is flog ago dead horse here, 136 questions
:11:32. > :11:35.today, three hours in parliament, answering every question put to him,
:11:35. > :11:42.he has apologised to him, set up numerous inquiries, there is
:11:42. > :11:47.nothing else you can expect him to do, if he has made mistakes he will
:11:47. > :11:51.admit it? David Cameron apologised for the furore about the
:11:51. > :11:55.appointment of Coulson, he didn't apologise for taking Coulson into
:11:56. > :12:00.the heart of Downing Street. said might? He ought to apologise
:12:00. > :12:03.now. Mr Coulson, as far as we know is an innocent man. We heard today
:12:03. > :12:06.David Cameron conceded that he was fully aware of the reports in the
:12:06. > :12:09.New York Times that made serious allegation about Andy Coulson. He
:12:09. > :12:13.wanted to look at Nick Clegg sat next to David Cameron today, who
:12:13. > :12:16.made it clear, he looked the Prime Minister in the eye and told him he
:12:17. > :12:22.shouldn't appoint Coulson to Downing Street. It is right we ask
:12:22. > :12:27.Nick Clegg to come clean about what he said to David Cameron in the
:12:27. > :12:32.early stages. It is repeating the mistake Miliband did today. You
:12:32. > :12:35.flog a dead horse and realise the horse is dead. These were petty
:12:35. > :12:39.party points today, Ed Miliband didn't realise the opportunity
:12:39. > :12:42.today for addressing some of the big issues. The Prime Minister was
:12:42. > :12:46.embarrassed when the BSkyB deal came up, there was a very pointed
:12:46. > :12:50.question from Mr Skinner today, why is that so difficult for the Prime
:12:50. > :12:53.Minister to handle? I don't think it was difficult, he made it
:12:53. > :12:56.absolutely clear there was no inappropriate discussions with
:12:56. > :12:59.BSkyB. What about these conversations? Happily Rebekah
:12:59. > :13:02.Brooks the previous day had testified to parliament that there
:13:03. > :13:06.were discussions with David Cameron that she wouldn't have had in front
:13:06. > :13:11.of the select committee. Your definition of appropriate is what
:13:11. > :13:15.Rebekah Brooks thinks? You are starting to split linguistic hair
:13:15. > :13:19.about this. What is important here is if anybody discussed the BSkyB
:13:20. > :13:23.bid it wouldn't have made any difference at all, even if they
:13:23. > :13:26.hadn't discussed it, which they say they hadn't. If they had discussed
:13:27. > :13:30.it, it wouldn't make a difference, because David Cameron was not
:13:31. > :13:34.deciding the BSkyB bid, it was decided completely independently by
:13:34. > :13:38.the Culture Secretary. The problem your party has and we know, it was
:13:38. > :13:41.clear from what Rupert Murdoch said yesterday, that Gordon Brown and
:13:41. > :13:44.Tony Blair had been sucking up to them for years? Isn't it
:13:44. > :13:47.interesting that Rebekah Brooks talked about appropriate
:13:47. > :13:50.conversations today, and David Cameron used appropriate
:13:50. > :13:53.conversations today, what is very important here, since March David
:13:54. > :13:58.Cameron has refused to tell me whether he has had discussions with
:13:58. > :14:01.Mr Murdoch or Miss Brooks about BSkyB. Today Jeremy Hunt said out
:14:01. > :14:05.of the blue today, the conversations that David Cameron
:14:05. > :14:08.has had, have been irrelevant, so, has he had conversations or hasn't
:14:08. > :14:11.he? I tell you why this matters, because if the Prime Minister's
:14:11. > :14:14.judgment is in question, this is the Prime Minister who has to make
:14:14. > :14:19.decisions about the economy, the health service, about welfare,
:14:19. > :14:22.about the future of our country, if he gets his judgment so wrong on an
:14:22. > :14:26.issue like Andy Coulson, people will start to ask questions about
:14:26. > :14:32.his judgment more generally. express regret for the appointment
:14:32. > :14:36.of Andy Coulson, this is linguistic hair spliting about what is an
:14:36. > :14:40.appropriate discussion. The mistake Labour have made is to do all the
:14:40. > :14:44.petty party points scoring, instead of looking at the big picture of
:14:44. > :14:48.how to reform this thing for the future, a better way of deciding
:14:48. > :14:51.media ownership, and clear up the issues with the police and have a
:14:51. > :14:55.better system of press regulation. He's a clear speaker, couldn't he
:14:56. > :15:00.clear it up and say I did have conversations with Rebekah Brooks
:15:00. > :15:03.and others about BSkyB, but it had no impact about the bid? Jeremy
:15:03. > :15:09.Hunt is the man who took the decision so whatever conversations
:15:09. > :15:12.were had they have no impact. not say and come clean. He made it
:15:12. > :15:16.absolutely clear to parliament he had no inappropriate discussion,
:15:16. > :15:19.and Rebekah Brooks, the one who was supposed to have discussed it with
:15:19. > :15:24.him, testified yesterday that she had no inappropriate discussions.
:15:24. > :15:27.This horse is dead, you keep flogging it. What is important
:15:27. > :15:31.about the whole process it was Ed Miliband who called for better
:15:31. > :15:36.regulation for the press in the whole process, it was Ed Miliband
:15:36. > :15:41.who called for an inquiry, it was Ed Miliband who said we need a New
:15:41. > :15:45.Cross party media ownership, if you have too much power in the media it
:15:45. > :15:48.leads to this. At every stage Ed Miliband has provided the
:15:48. > :15:53.leadership. He's catching up now, but you were in Government for five
:15:53. > :15:56.or six years, nothing was done. Thank you very much, enjoy your
:15:56. > :15:59.holiday A series of inquiries have been
:15:59. > :16:03.launched as a result of the scandal which has already changed the media
:16:03. > :16:06.landscape, as we know phone hacking by newspapers in the future, as you
:16:06. > :16:10.might think, is not very likely. The sale of BSkyB to Rupert Murdoch,
:16:10. > :16:15.as we have been discussing, has been postponed, perhaps forever,
:16:15. > :16:18.there are calls for privacy legislation, and as tempers cool,
:16:18. > :16:22.will there really be any permanent changes when it comes to press
:16:22. > :16:25.investigations, or intrusion, into people's private lives. Will this
:16:25. > :16:29.whole affair hasten the decline of newspapers. I'm joined by Max
:16:29. > :16:34.Clifford, who has enjoyed many celebrities about how to get their
:16:34. > :16:37.stories in and out of newspaper, and Max Moseley, a strong
:16:38. > :16:41.campaigner for privacy law after winning a libel case against News
:16:41. > :16:44.of the World. One thing that has changed is the death of the News of
:16:44. > :16:47.the World, are you happy about that? Obviously it is sad when
:16:47. > :16:50.people lose their jobs, but at least they will not be able to do
:16:50. > :16:55.to other people what they did to me and several people. That has
:16:55. > :16:58.stopped now I think that is a God thing it should stop. You had a big
:16:58. > :17:03.payout from the News of the World, some people said it was a million
:17:03. > :17:08.pounds, are you sad or happy they have gone? I'm sad they have gone,
:17:08. > :17:12.because the people that have been sacked, but actually they had
:17:12. > :17:16.nothing to do with it. There is a few hundred people who have lost
:17:16. > :17:20.their jobs that had no connection whatsoever with phone hacking.
:17:20. > :17:25.you are sad. Am I right in thinking that the appetite for the kind of
:17:25. > :17:28.stories they did will continue in the public so, the desire to fulfil
:17:28. > :17:34.that in newspapers will continue, nothing big will change, the title
:17:34. > :17:38.will go, but somebody else will do it? The Sunday Mirror printed an
:17:38. > :17:42.extra million couple, the Star, several hundred thousand, they all
:17:42. > :17:46.sold far greater numbers than they had previously, there is a huge
:17:46. > :17:49.market. They are trying to capture that market. As indeed is the Mail
:17:49. > :17:53.on Sunday. That won't change, people will still be looking at
:17:53. > :17:56.your private life and the private lives of other people?
:17:56. > :17:59.difference is now there is a recognition that we need to
:17:59. > :18:02.safeguard privacy. Where until now there was no chance of getting any
:18:02. > :18:07.sort of law done in England because parliament, the Government, even
:18:07. > :18:11.the police, were all in the thral of Murdoch, now that has been
:18:11. > :18:14.broken, I think there is every chance the spligss will look at
:18:14. > :18:22.this objectively instead of asking themselves would it please Mr
:18:22. > :18:26.Murdoch. Do you think the fear of the Murdoch has gone and they have
:18:26. > :18:31.lost their power they had, so there is an appetite for the privacy law?
:18:31. > :18:34.You have seen that. Mr Miliband, someone said to me what are the
:18:34. > :18:40.Taliban doing asking questions in parliament, the other day. But they
:18:40. > :18:46.are all standing up to Murdoch mur, they are all, if you like,
:18:46. > :18:50.criticising, none of them would have done that before, they were
:18:50. > :18:53.afraid of him. At the moment, Rupert Murdoch is a very powerful
:18:53. > :18:57.and clever man, he won't take what has happened lying down. We will
:18:57. > :19:02.see what he comes back with. The man has a lot of power worldwide n
:19:02. > :19:06.Australia he has 70% of the media, big chunks in America. We think the
:19:06. > :19:10.difficulty is when all the stuff comes out that is coming out now,
:19:10. > :19:14.when all the information comes out, when we learn the full contents of
:19:14. > :19:17.the Harbottle & Lewis dossier, for example, I think Murdoch will have
:19:17. > :19:21.great difficulty keeping control of his company. I think he may well
:19:22. > :19:31.end up going. That might be the case, but the reality is, I was in
:19:31. > :19:35.a fish and chip shop in Byfleet, called Super Fish, I said everyone
:19:35. > :19:39.has a right to privacy, but would you like to know the secrets of the
:19:39. > :19:43.rich and famous, that was what they were saying. Everybody loves gossip,
:19:43. > :19:49.it doesn't mean it is right to print it. That is the whole point.
:19:49. > :19:52.So when it is pure gossip, when it is tittle tattle, when it is tawdry
:19:52. > :19:56.revelations, there is a strong argument for not doing it. I think
:19:56. > :20:00.we will get a law to stop it. hope there is not a law, I hope
:20:00. > :20:07.there is a free pre, but a Press Complaints Commission that actually
:20:07. > :20:11.is - press, but a Press Complaints Commission that is actually strong
:20:11. > :20:15.enough to take care of the phone hacking and things like that. If
:20:15. > :20:19.you intrude into somebody's private life, you have to justify it on the
:20:19. > :20:23.grounds that the public should know this. It very much depend ones the
:20:23. > :20:26.differences between what the public is interested in, in the fish and
:20:26. > :20:31.chip shop, and what is in the public interest, the public might
:20:31. > :20:35.be interested in Ryan Giggs sex life, but it is not necessarily in
:20:35. > :20:38.the public interest? That is the law we have now. If you balance the
:20:38. > :20:42.right of the individual to privacy against the right of the public to
:20:42. > :20:46.know, and the judge applies a very intense fob cuss. The really
:20:46. > :20:50.important thing is - focus. The really important thing is when it
:20:50. > :20:56.is very focused it should be a judge not a tabloid editor which
:20:56. > :21:00.has a strong vested interest. system is at the moment is unless
:21:00. > :21:03.you are rich you can't take out the super-injunctions. You help people
:21:04. > :21:08.in these case, financially, because you know that you have the means to
:21:08. > :21:11.do that? First of all, Max is quite right, that is not a criticism of
:21:11. > :21:17.the law, it is a criticism of the legal system, that alies all over,
:21:17. > :21:20.it is too expensive. On the particular point, yes, I did and
:21:20. > :21:26.have been helping a few civil actions, that, to begin with was
:21:26. > :21:28.the only way to get it into the public domain. Do you think having
:21:28. > :21:32.anybody own 40% of the British press, or whatever the figure, do
:21:32. > :21:38.you think that is healthy? No, I have said for a long time, I think
:21:38. > :21:41.probably something like 20-25% is the maximum any single person
:21:42. > :21:47.should be entitled to, in terms of the control of the media in one
:21:47. > :21:50.country, let alone 40%, with BSkyB it would have been a lot more. I
:21:51. > :21:54.can't see then, anyone is too powerful and too strong and the
:21:54. > :21:58.politicians need the support of the media. Far too much power in the
:21:59. > :22:01.hands of one group. The combination of the press and television, it
:22:01. > :22:06.should never have got to this stage. You are in business, you have been
:22:06. > :22:13.in business for your whole life, do you think the Murdoch empire will
:22:13. > :22:20.unravel? I think it will probably get broken up, at least in this
:22:20. > :22:24.country, there is a problem with one family having so much power, it
:22:24. > :22:28.is wrong. We need media plurality. Are you very happy to have taken
:22:28. > :22:32.the payout from News International for invading your privacy, it was
:22:32. > :22:37.obviously a difficult moment for you, you got a lot of cash out of
:22:38. > :22:42.them? At the time I wasen the only one to take them on, as one of the
:22:42. > :22:46.five people named nobody else went after them, when I got my
:22:46. > :22:52.settlement people came out of the wood work and had the courage to
:22:52. > :22:57.stand up with them. It was wrong, I had good relationship with News of
:22:57. > :23:02.the World, as I have with every other newspaper and around the
:23:02. > :23:05.world. I fell out with Coulson, we fell out over something, it wasn't
:23:05. > :23:15.News of the World, I was still dealing with the other papers and
:23:15. > :23:17.
:23:17. > :23:20.Sky. Did you have to sign a confidentiality report? No nothing
:23:20. > :23:25.at all. The problems of the media have got gone away, in fact they
:23:25. > :23:30.might have become even worse. The head of an emergency summit
:23:30. > :23:36.tomorrow, the IMF has warned European leders to get their act
:23:36. > :23:45.together and be more bold in stablising countries like Greece or
:23:45. > :23:49.there will be global spillovers. The situation is very serious.
:23:49. > :23:54.On the surface this is all about managing what they are calling a
:23:54. > :23:59.partial default by Greece. In other words, that financing a new aid
:23:59. > :24:02.package to Greece will involve giving back to people money already
:24:02. > :24:06.lent to Greece less than they expected. There is something much
:24:06. > :24:11.deeper at stake here, as different key players in Europe put forward
:24:11. > :24:16.rival plans. And that is, the apparent disunity between France,
:24:16. > :24:21.Germany, the big powers in the eurozone, and that is something
:24:21. > :24:24.that sets a bad signal for the future for handling the other
:24:25. > :24:31.sovereign debt crises that are bound to occur, that is what has
:24:31. > :24:36.spooked the markets. As Greece waits for a new bailout,
:24:36. > :24:40.Government austerity policies continue to provoke unrest. Taxi
:24:40. > :24:44.drivers facing deregulation see themselves in a fight for their
:24:44. > :24:49.livelihoods, today it turned violent. And as Europe struggles to
:24:49. > :24:54.make up its mind about a new package the markets are losing what
:24:54. > :24:58.faith they had, pushing the price of borrowing up for other
:24:58. > :25:02.Governments, including Italy's. meeting is very important, this is
:25:02. > :25:09.the real answer to the situation that we are facing. It is not only
:25:09. > :25:13.the entire situation, the way in which Europe will manage a
:25:13. > :25:18.situation which has been getting worse and worse. So the pressure on
:25:18. > :25:23.leaders, critically those of France and Germany, to settle their
:25:23. > :25:26.differences over the sovereign debt crisis, is growing steeply. Germany
:25:26. > :25:31.has argued the banks themselves must share the pain of a new
:25:31. > :25:35.bailout. But several other powerful EU countries say that would
:25:35. > :25:39.effectively mark a partial Greek default, possibly triggering
:25:39. > :25:44.financial turmoil. The head of the European Commission appealed today
:25:44. > :25:51.for these differences to be settled now.
:25:51. > :25:56.Nobody should be under any illusion. The situation is very serious. It
:25:57. > :26:01.requires a response, otherwise the negative consequences will be felt
:26:01. > :26:05.in all corners of Europe, and beyond. So the challenge facing the
:26:05. > :26:09.leaders who will arrive tomorrow is clear enough. The question, though,
:26:09. > :26:15.is whether they will be equal to it, and how they will reconcile an
:26:15. > :26:23.array of possible options, almost all of which have serious downsides.
:26:23. > :26:27.So, given that, is there going to be a deal? The German Chancellor,
:26:27. > :26:31.Angela Merkel was playing it down earlier this week, President
:26:31. > :26:36.Sarkozy has gone to Berlin tonight to try to get common agreement, if
:26:36. > :26:40.France and Germany, the two great motors of the eurozone, political
:26:40. > :26:44.and economic, can agree on this, the best way to put this package
:26:44. > :26:50.together for Greece, then the rift will be healed between those two on
:26:50. > :26:54.this issue, and things can move ahead. Now there is still
:26:54. > :27:01.disagreement about this central issue, which is that the Germans
:27:01. > :27:05.want banks to pay for at least some of this bailout, about 50 billion
:27:05. > :27:11.euros worth, they want to do that from a tax op the banks that have
:27:11. > :27:13.benefited from selling and dealing in Greek debt. The French don't
:27:13. > :27:17.like that, obviously the financial markets are particularly nervous
:27:17. > :27:22.about that idea. It seems to penalise people to give them back
:27:22. > :27:24.less than they were expecting. That's the crux of it. But the key
:27:24. > :27:29.thing really will be, whether any further agreement can be made in
:27:29. > :27:33.the coming two days, both in Berlin, and then in Brussels later tomorrow
:27:33. > :27:38.and Friday. On what the right mechanism should be with dealing of
:27:38. > :27:41.crises of this nature. Because it is bound to reoccur, possibly with
:27:41. > :27:47.the Spanish, with the Italians, with the Portuguese.
:27:47. > :27:52.I'm joined now here in the studio by the Shadow Chancellor, Balls. We
:27:52. > :27:59.have seen a series of sticky plasters and that will continue, do
:27:59. > :28:02.you think the euro will continue in its present form? I think the euro
:28:02. > :28:05.will last because there is a political commitment. Sticky
:28:05. > :28:08.plaster after sticky plaster has been found out for a year now
:28:08. > :28:13.because of a lack of decisive leadership from the Governments in
:28:13. > :28:17.the eurozone to say we will sort this out. The crisis has moved from
:28:17. > :28:21.Greece to Portugal and Ireland, now to Spain and Italy. This is hugely,
:28:21. > :28:26.hugely dangerous and serious, and will have a direct impact on the UK
:28:26. > :28:31.as well. We can't be bystanders, we are close to a real crisis. But we
:28:31. > :28:35.can't be bystanders, but we have no way of particularly influencing
:28:35. > :28:40.this, we are not playing in the euro, and you say lack of
:28:40. > :28:43.leadership, that may be true, Britain can't offer it, what can
:28:43. > :28:47.they do? Can, there is no doubt our Prime Minister and Chancellor have
:28:47. > :28:52.been distracted in recent weeks, but the fact is that this is key to
:28:52. > :28:56.our national interest. Half of our trade is with our European partners.
:28:56. > :28:59.What should they do? They should say we are not in the eurozone, I
:28:59. > :29:04.have to say thank goodness we are not, for Britain to be in the
:29:04. > :29:09.eurozone would be a complete catastrophy. That is another reason
:29:09. > :29:13.for saying we can't be in leadership? We can be an honest
:29:13. > :29:16.broker. In past crises other countries have worked closely with
:29:16. > :29:20.each other, the same should shap now. Our Prime Minister should go
:29:20. > :29:24.to the meeting tomorrow, our Chancellor should be engaged in the
:29:24. > :29:27.debates actively tomorrow. To do what, what should they say? They
:29:27. > :29:30.should say you have to deal with the situation as it is now. You
:29:30. > :29:37.have to stop the contagion, you have to accept that unless there
:29:37. > :29:41.are clear guarantee, which are European wide, or eurozone wide, to
:29:41. > :29:46.say we will put a guarantee under the debt of these countries, the
:29:46. > :29:50.crisis is going to get worse and worse and worse. Has to be done. It
:29:50. > :29:54.does mean more co-ordination. means German tax-payers have to
:29:54. > :29:59.guarantee Greek debt? That is the reality. You wouldn't British tax-
:29:59. > :30:03.payers to do that. That is why we are not in the eurozone That is the
:30:03. > :30:07.price you pay for going into a single currency. Countries like
:30:07. > :30:12.Greece have borrowed more cheaply because they were part of the
:30:12. > :30:16.eurozone area. The point where that becomes clear it is in doubt there
:30:17. > :30:20.is a crisis interest rates go up, the debt is not sustainable, as it
:30:20. > :30:24.spreads into Spain and Italy, it is billions of exposure, hugely
:30:24. > :30:29.significant, and the world cannot allow the eurozone to fail to
:30:29. > :30:34.resolve its political issues and allow that contagion to destablise
:30:34. > :30:38.the British and global economy. are effectively saying that the
:30:38. > :30:42.eurozone has to get tighter and tighter bound together more tightly,
:30:42. > :30:45.that the Germans really have to, you are saying that is implicit in
:30:45. > :30:49.the project, that leaves Britain further on outsued, this is really
:30:49. > :30:53.a two-speed Europe with Britain on the outside? I don't think it was
:30:53. > :30:59.inevitable that the eurozone had to have that degree of fiscal co-
:30:59. > :31:03.ordination, the more it went wide to countries in southern Europe it
:31:03. > :31:07.was raisek. In European politics you have to deal with reality, the
:31:07. > :31:11.reality is without greater burden sharing and co-ordination it will
:31:11. > :31:15.be in deep crisis. The German taxpayer will have to be told this
:31:15. > :31:18.is where we are. Britain would have more leverage, would they not, for
:31:18. > :31:22.example, if the Labour Party voted against doubling the increase in
:31:22. > :31:25.our contribution to the IMF, the Government was in favour of it, it
:31:25. > :31:31.went through. You seem to be saying we should be telling people how to
:31:31. > :31:35.do things but you are not prepared to do any money to it? I'm in
:31:35. > :31:38.fairness with the prescription, not without sorting out the European
:31:38. > :31:40.issues. The fact is our Government, our Chancellor and our Prime
:31:40. > :31:46.Minister, have basically been absent from this debate in the last
:31:46. > :31:50.year. We should be trying to lead these debates. They feel it is
:31:50. > :31:54.complex, as Euro-sceptics we should keep out of it. We should be in
:31:55. > :31:59.there making the argument, I don't think there should be a taxpayer
:31:59. > :32:03.contribution to a eurozone facility. With great respect Ed Miliband two
:32:03. > :32:07.weeks ago was being accused of not being able to lead his party, he
:32:07. > :32:13.won't be able to lead Europe? Leadership is about dealing with
:32:13. > :32:17.crises as they come along with a clear strategic view. In the last
:32:17. > :32:22.two weeks Ed Miliband has had a clear strategic view on the hacking
:32:22. > :32:25.and has led the debate. Our Prime Minister can't lead on hacking or
:32:25. > :32:29.in Europe. That is a dangerous place for Britain to find ourselves,
:32:30. > :32:34.essentially in the European debates, headless, when jobs and growth in
:32:34. > :32:38.Britain are at risk. Do you see an appetite for the German tax-payers
:32:39. > :32:43.to do what you have been suggesting, it is suggested within Europe, and
:32:43. > :32:47.there is hugely contentious issues within Germany? In the end it will
:32:47. > :32:52.happen, the longer it takes the more dangerous the crisis is. Our
:32:53. > :32:57.Prime Minister and Chancellor should be urging action, and that
:32:57. > :33:00.co-ordination. Spending other people's money is the point I'm
:33:00. > :33:06.making? They shouldn't just say the bigger your cuts the faster, the
:33:06. > :33:10.better. It hasn't worked in Greece or Ireland, here in Britain we will
:33:10. > :33:14.have GDP figures, what has happened in the last six months is our
:33:14. > :33:16.economy has flatlined. We are trying to take that medicine and it
:33:16. > :33:23.isn't working, no wonder our Chancellor of the Exchequer is
:33:23. > :33:27.worried tonight. My view is it is time for a bit of leadership.
:33:27. > :33:30.Nine days are all you have left to tell the Government what you think
:33:30. > :33:33.about HS2, the high-speed rail network which is planned to cut
:33:33. > :33:39.journey times between the north and south of England, with trains
:33:39. > :33:43.moving at more than 200 miles an hour. The cost, �32 billion.
:33:43. > :33:48.Critics, many who live along the proposed route, say it is a waste
:33:48. > :33:58.of money. Others say it is the only way to make the railways fit for
:33:58. > :34:07.
:34:07. > :34:10.the 21st isn'try. Will HS2 ever I'm about to catch a train from
:34:10. > :34:14.Birmingham to London, I'm looking forward to the time of reading a
:34:14. > :34:18.book or do work. If the high-speed rail service comes in, more than
:34:18. > :34:22.half an hour will be cut from my journey. It will cost an absolute
:34:22. > :34:29.fortune, but supporters say it will deliver huge benefits to the
:34:29. > :34:32.economy. Even at current speeds, long
:34:32. > :34:36.distance train travel has become increasingly popular in Britain,
:34:36. > :34:41.and the trains are getting more crowded. Building extra capacity is
:34:41. > :34:48.part of a case for HS2, the high- speed rail project. Long distance
:34:48. > :34:52.rail trips almost doubled in the period from 195 to 2008. Domestic
:34:52. > :34:57.air travel grew rapidly too, but dipped sharply in recent years.
:34:57. > :35:01.While the number of long car journies has hardly grown at all.
:35:01. > :35:07.Just about everyone thinks the rail network needs extra leg room, but
:35:07. > :35:11.there is violent disagreement on whether HS2 is the answer.
:35:11. > :35:16.doesn't stack um economically, environmently, even technically it
:35:16. > :35:19.can't operate in the way they said it should. We need the confidence
:35:19. > :35:29.to develop the best technology available and make sure we are
:35:29. > :35:35.
:35:35. > :35:40.connecting our cities properly and A big part of the economic case for
:35:40. > :35:43.high-speed rail depends on the idea of saving people time. The
:35:43. > :35:47.assumption is that valuable people are spending lots of valuable
:35:47. > :35:52.minutes doing absolutely nothing when they could be working. But
:35:52. > :35:57.does that really hold up any more? On any train these days, and not
:35:57. > :36:02.just in first class, you will find people working away on laptops and
:36:02. > :36:06.smartphones. Not only can I work, but I do it in comfort, and I'm not
:36:06. > :36:10.disturbed by phone call, I'm more productive here than sometimes I am
:36:10. > :36:13.in my office. But will getting to the office half an hour faster mean
:36:13. > :36:17.a big boost to productivity? don't think it will make a
:36:17. > :36:22.difference at all. I'm not sure it is money well spent. I work two to
:36:22. > :36:27.three days a week in Birmingham. And we use the Internet and
:36:27. > :36:31.conference calls any way. So really, I mean, we're living in a much more
:36:31. > :36:36.technological age, I don't really see, I think it would be good to
:36:36. > :36:41.invest maybe more in better Wi-Fi for more people. At speeds of 225
:36:41. > :36:45.miles an hour or more, the HS2 project promises to transform rail
:36:45. > :36:50.travel. It is in two stages. First the line from London to Birmingham,
:36:50. > :36:56.to be completed by around 2026, at a cost of something like �17
:36:56. > :37:00.billion. That will cut the time of the fastest journey from an hour
:37:00. > :37:04.and 24 minutes to 49 minutes, there will be a knock-on effect for
:37:04. > :37:08.trains heading further afield. The real time savings in the north of
:37:08. > :37:14.England come in the next phase, to be completed in the mid-2030s,
:37:14. > :37:17.pushing the total bill up to �32 billion. That would reduce the
:37:17. > :37:22.journey time to Manchester to 55 minutes, to an hour and 13 minutes.
:37:23. > :37:29.While an hour will come off a trip to Leeds, putting that city an hour
:37:29. > :37:34.and 20 minutes from London. There is now ferocious opposition
:37:34. > :37:37.to the plans, mostly from those living along the route. Opponents
:37:37. > :37:42.say they prefer investment in existing networks, where passengers
:37:42. > :37:47.would see benefits sooner. HS2, they claim, doesn't make any sense.
:37:47. > :37:51.The business case is deeply flawed, I'm a business person and been
:37:51. > :37:56.through many business cases and produced them. The costs exceed the
:37:56. > :37:59.benefits, that is perception it will help the north, when all the
:37:59. > :38:07.economist ace gree they will benefit primarily in London. Most
:38:07. > :38:14.of the jobs will be created in London. This is an exciting, sexy,
:38:14. > :38:18.pointy-nose projects at a time of austerity, like Concorde, can we
:38:18. > :38:22.spend more than �1,000 a household for something that is not top of
:38:22. > :38:28.the priority list and doing it in the most expensive possible way
:38:28. > :38:31.with a completely new line. Business supports of the - Business
:38:31. > :38:35.supporters say the economy will suffer in the north if it isn't
:38:35. > :38:41.built and it is not just about speed. It is about tackling the
:38:41. > :38:48.capacity restraint, I haven't seen a better way to tackle the chronic
:38:48. > :38:52.capacity restraints we will face in the Network Rail. East Coast Main
:38:52. > :38:56.Line will be full within 12 years, this is the best way to tackle the
:38:56. > :39:01.capacity. The time savings are like the icing on the cake. They bring
:39:01. > :39:07.additional economic and regeneration benefits.
:39:07. > :39:10.Whether you think spending billions on high-speed rail is a good idea,
:39:10. > :39:15.is how you see our working lives changing in the next few decades.
:39:15. > :39:21.Is Britain going to be a country where Japanese-style bullet trains
:39:21. > :39:27.speed to us meetings one hundreds of miles away in minutes, or does
:39:27. > :39:34.it like this. Matt runs a software business a few miles from the high-
:39:34. > :39:38.speed line. Jane hasn't met Billy. Everyone has been in the same room
:39:38. > :39:43.not necessarily at the same time. He and four colleagues spread
:39:43. > :39:50.across south-east England, meet on- line, rather than by hopping on to
:39:50. > :39:55.a train. Where would you guys like money spent on high-speed rail or
:39:55. > :40:03.high-speed broadband? Both. My vote is for high-speed broadband, that
:40:03. > :40:06.is a more effective way of bringing people together in the future.
:40:06. > :40:16.want high-speed broadband on trains!
:40:16. > :40:16.
:40:16. > :40:23.This is the office of the future! For one huge train enthusiast, the
:40:23. > :40:29.idea that fast broadband might replace fast trains is preposterous.
:40:29. > :40:35.The music producer, Pete waterman commutes from London to Warrington
:40:35. > :40:39.three times a week. Broadband doened employ people, all it does
:40:39. > :40:42.is make telecommunication companies richer. Do we want to employ people
:40:42. > :40:47.and distribute the wealth and bring more people into the working ethic,
:40:47. > :40:52.or do we want to just put everybody playing games all day long. What
:40:52. > :40:57.about the mounting evidence that the business case for HS2 doesn't
:40:57. > :41:03.add up? No way the numbers add up, that is where the argument all
:41:03. > :41:06.falls down, this is the dream. Build it and they will come. You
:41:06. > :41:11.cannot analyse railway, you have never been able to. Since they
:41:11. > :41:15.built the first railways, everybody has been doing figures. If you are
:41:15. > :41:20.going to do that, don't build the railway. You can make 50 arguments
:41:20. > :41:26.for and against. What they never do, is look at history and say every
:41:26. > :41:30.time we built a new railway the country has changed for the better.
:41:30. > :41:34.My trip to London is almost over, 80 minutes of wasted time or
:41:35. > :41:39.productive work, take your pick. The truth is, the case for HS2 is
:41:39. > :41:43.full of so many variables it is impossible to say today whether two
:41:43. > :41:48.decades from now it will prove worthwhile. So, politics, not
:41:48. > :41:54.economics, could decide where this journaly ends.
:41:54. > :41:58.Now joining me is the Conservative MP whose constituency lies on the
:41:58. > :42:01.route, and joining me from Birmingham is Patrick Twist, who
:42:01. > :42:06.signed an open letter from business people supporting the Government's
:42:06. > :42:12.plans. Why is it not the answer? simply doesn't make sense from a
:42:12. > :42:16.taxpayer, value for money perspective, there is an awful lot
:42:16. > :42:20.you can do with �30 billion, that will generate a lot more new jobs
:42:20. > :42:25.in the north of England. It is not just new jobs, it is about getting
:42:25. > :42:29.around this country, you do accept there are real problems on the
:42:29. > :42:35.Network Rail? It doesn't solve those either. The rail problems are
:42:35. > :42:38.now, we are incredibly congested on the West Coast Mainline. This
:42:38. > :42:42.wouldn't do anything until 2026, 15 years away. There is a lot to be
:42:42. > :42:47.done now, not waiting until then. What is the case for building this,
:42:47. > :42:50.why do we need it? I think it is primarily the capacity issue, and I
:42:50. > :42:53.have heard what Angela said, but the reality is that improvements of
:42:53. > :42:57.that nature won't be delivered within the next six months or so.
:42:57. > :43:01.Whatever the nature of them, they will be delivered over a longer
:43:01. > :43:06.period. And the sort of improvement that is we are talking about would
:43:06. > :43:10.not deliver the added capacity that is going to be needed in the long-
:43:10. > :43:14.term through to the middle of this century. But Mr Twist I was struck
:43:14. > :43:21.by hearing one of the leading advocates for it, effectively
:43:21. > :43:24.saying it is a leap of faith that will cost the taxpayer �32 billion?
:43:25. > :43:29.I don't endorse that, I don't think it will cost the taxpayer �3
:43:29. > :43:33.billion. If you look at the case for HS2, the benefit cost ratio,
:43:33. > :43:36.that is the ratio from cost to benefit, it comes out according to
:43:36. > :43:40.the department for transport, who historically have not supported
:43:40. > :43:44.rail projects. It comes out at 2-1. I know that a lot of people
:43:44. > :43:47.watching this will think you don't like it because it goes through an
:43:47. > :43:52.area that affects your constituent, and naturally they will be
:43:52. > :44:01.irritated by it, not in my backyard. We see that with projects from wind
:44:01. > :44:06.farms to high-speed rail links? am not a NIMOBY. It was raised to
:44:06. > :44:11.my attention because it was going through the middle of countryside.
:44:11. > :44:16.I supported the principle in March 2010, and objected to the route.
:44:16. > :44:22.Over that time I have spent a lot of time looking into the business
:44:22. > :44:26.case and the detail. It doesn't add up, tax-payers have a right to that
:44:26. > :44:31.money. You don't want it to go through anywhere, you think it is
:44:31. > :44:35.wrong. What would happen if we don't build it. Would would be the
:44:36. > :44:39.downside for the country. We would have the issue of capacity,
:44:39. > :44:43.whereby I don't know if you travel on the West Coast Mainline, already
:44:43. > :44:47.if you travel up on a Thursday or Friday evening, you will find that
:44:47. > :44:51.the trains are already full. We would be just left further behind,
:44:51. > :44:56.you look across the world and see what's happened. In 1964 the
:44:56. > :45:02.Japanese built their first line from Tokyo to Osaka, I haven't
:45:02. > :45:06.heard the Japanese saying that was a mistake. In France, 30 years ago,
:45:06. > :45:11.they are connected to two major cities, Paris and Lyon, they have
:45:11. > :45:15.expanded it further. I entirely endorse what was said there, build
:45:15. > :45:19.it and they will come. That is true about France and also Japan and
:45:19. > :45:23.Spain? Of course there is an issue of distances, they have far greater
:45:23. > :45:27.distances to travel. There is also an issue that there is some magical
:45:27. > :45:30.thinking about the benefits of those projects, some of them have
:45:30. > :45:35.been reduced. In China they are slowing their high-speed trains
:45:35. > :45:38.down. In France there isn't an overwhelming endorsement for the
:45:38. > :45:41.regenerative capabilities of high- speed rail. Very often the
:45:41. > :45:46.regeneration is sucked into the city and way from the hub that is
:45:46. > :45:50.seeking to benefit. With Members of Parliament at last
:45:51. > :45:54.heading off for their summer break, we wanted to bring back the best
:45:54. > :45:58.political brains in Britain. It says here, the Newsnight panel to
:45:58. > :46:03.give us their thoughts on where we are in the hacking scandal and
:46:03. > :46:06.politics more widely. I'm joined by Danny Finkelstein, who is a Times
:46:07. > :46:12.columnist and used to be an MP for the Conservatives. Julian Astle,
:46:12. > :46:16.and Peter Hyman. We have all been very entertained,
:46:16. > :46:21.informed, it has been a fascinated, extraordinary couple of week, but
:46:21. > :46:25.for the party leaders, has anything changed? Quite a lot has. Mainly in
:46:25. > :46:29.the Westminster bubble, this issue won't decide the next election,
:46:29. > :46:34.let's be clear about that. It has changed the dynamics, Ed Miliband
:46:34. > :46:38.is on the front foot, a good week or two. David Cameron has looked
:46:38. > :46:42.very uncomfortable, he has been on the back foot. It is a frustrating
:46:42. > :46:47.few weeks for Nick Clegg, what he knows, most people would concede,
:46:47. > :46:52.his party is the one party of the three that has managed to keep Anne
:46:52. > :46:55.proper rate distance from the Murdoch people. Maybe it is the
:46:55. > :47:01.other way round he would concede that too. For whatever reason that
:47:01. > :47:06.is the historical fact. He hasn't a platform to make that case. He has
:47:06. > :47:09.been sidelined. The good news from his narrow party political
:47:09. > :47:13.perspective is this is a slow burn story. We have a year, maybe two
:47:13. > :47:17.years of inquiries, revelations, investigations and so forth, as
:47:17. > :47:20.that happens it will reflect well on the Liberal Democrats?
:47:20. > :47:25.That is true, it won't go away however well David Cameron did
:47:25. > :47:29.today? It won't go away for a story, nor ought it. Julian is right, it
:47:29. > :47:33.is not an election settler. It will change the terms of trade in
:47:33. > :47:37.Westminster, it already has t will help Ed Miliband, particularly with
:47:37. > :47:40.his party base. Because, I think one of the reasons why he went down
:47:40. > :47:46.disastrously, with his party base, was over the strike, and this
:47:47. > :47:51.helped him to rebound. He restored the drop that it had in his numbers.
:47:51. > :47:54.Is that true for the Labour Party, Miliband is saved as the leader, is
:47:54. > :47:58.that good? It has given him a lot of space to talk about the things
:47:58. > :48:03.he needs to, like the economy and health. He will be listened to in a
:48:03. > :48:06.new way. I don't agree with this idea that no-one out there care
:48:06. > :48:10.about this, they really care about education, health and the economy.
:48:10. > :48:13.Of course that is true, but these things are connected. I remember in
:48:13. > :48:17.Government working for Tony Blair, when there was a trust issue about
:48:18. > :48:23.Tony Blair on an issue, on the other issues like health or
:48:23. > :48:26.education, the polling went down. So, in fact, the trust contaminates
:48:27. > :48:30.everything else. That is fair point. Just a minute, my guess is people
:48:30. > :48:34.will look at the economy differently now and cuts, which the
:48:34. > :48:39.Tories have wriggled out so far, because they trust Cameron a bit
:48:39. > :48:43.less. It is true, most don't study the detail of the cuts and what
:48:43. > :48:47.will happen to the NHS. We do think we know something about character,
:48:47. > :48:51.that will be a problem? This has presented itself to most people
:48:51. > :48:54.primarily as an issue about politics, it is primarily an issue
:48:54. > :48:56.about my profession, with journalism and the police. The
:48:56. > :49:00.effect on Cameron will be the misjudgment over Coulson, and
:49:00. > :49:04.people do think that is a misjudgment ta, has affected them.
:49:04. > :49:09.There will be some bleed over, I wouldn't exaggerate it into other
:49:09. > :49:12.issues, there has been a sort of hysteria in Westminster about the
:49:12. > :49:16.political impact this is likely to have in the medium term. It doesn't
:49:16. > :49:20.mean it is not a hugely important issue, people do care. The politics
:49:20. > :49:26.will be very important. significance of this for David
:49:26. > :49:30.Cameron, frankly, is it seems to reinforce his negatives. He is
:49:30. > :49:33.captured, he is a prisoner of his own background. He's seen as the
:49:33. > :49:37.high society, blue-blooded, Conservative, which very rich and
:49:37. > :49:41.powerful friends, who perhaps he is cut off from, who doesn't
:49:41. > :49:45.understand the majority of the country. The pictures of him with
:49:45. > :49:49.Rebekah Brooks and the Murdochs and all the rest of it simply reinforce
:49:49. > :49:53.that, that may be unfair but that is the fact of the matter.
:49:53. > :49:57.doesn't just look cosy in that sense, we heard all the stuff about
:49:57. > :50:02.Gordon Brown and Tony Blair, when Cameron says we are all in it
:50:02. > :50:07.together, do you not think the people in the chip shop is going to
:50:07. > :50:11.say, you are all in this together? The Blair-Murdoch relationship was
:50:11. > :50:15.not a friendship one. I was in the room when Tony Blair said, Rupert
:50:15. > :50:18.Murdoch came a friend of mine. He actually said that. I was there.
:50:18. > :50:24.This is a different one, this is about a set mixing together, this
:50:24. > :50:29.is about them living together, it is about them socialising, they are
:50:29. > :50:33.genuine friends, Rebekah Brooks and David Cameron. In terms of people
:50:33. > :50:36.who meet doing business. I think there was a different relationship.
:50:36. > :50:40.I think Tony Blair, God bless him was genuine in the relationship he
:50:40. > :50:43.had with Rupert Murdoch, he wanted to go after, because he thought
:50:43. > :50:52.that Rupert Murdoch had an understanding of what his readers
:50:52. > :50:59.believed in, and he wanted to show that he was an appeal it him.
:50:59. > :51:04.crucified Neil Kinnock in 1982 so the press being there is not
:51:04. > :51:09.truement I'm struck by a genuine friendship being a bad thing?
:51:09. > :51:14.struck by the phrase "I was in the room", all of these guys were in
:51:14. > :51:17.the room. For many years Liberal Democrats have been patronised and
:51:17. > :51:22.laughed at because they were never in the room, now it is a good thing
:51:22. > :51:25.not to be in the room. That is all from Newsnight tonight, Michelle is
:51:25. > :51:35.here with more tomorrow, good nationwide.
:51:35. > :51:36.
:51:36. > :51:43.Hello, if it is warm sunny weather you are after, don't hold your
:51:43. > :51:50.breath. Patience is a virttu, cloud around for many - virtue, cloud
:51:50. > :51:53.around for many of us tomorrow. Scattered showers, some meaty by
:51:53. > :51:56.the afternoon. Wherever you are, disappointingly cool once more,
:51:56. > :52:00.with temperatures stuck in the mid- to high teens for the most part.
:52:00. > :52:04.Difficult to nail down exactly where the showers will occur. The
:52:04. > :52:07.potential is there. That said, across the far South-West of
:52:08. > :52:12.England, there are showers sticking out in sunshine, the west of Wales
:52:12. > :52:15.too. The majority of Wales will be disappointingly cloudy, with bursts
:52:15. > :52:19.of rain developing by the afternoon. On a more optimistic note, Northern
:52:20. > :52:23.Ireland will stay largely dry, with broken cloud and some sunshine.
:52:23. > :52:25.Scotland too. There will be showers, particularly up over the high
:52:26. > :52:30.ground. Many places probably avoiding these and staying dryer
:52:30. > :52:34.than we have seen recently. Looking further ahead, a lot of cloud and
:52:34. > :52:37.further showers rate right the way through to the afternoon.
:52:37. > :52:41.Disappointingly cool across many areas. Chilly nights to come. A
:52:41. > :52:47.similar story further south. Some bright spells but a lot of cloud,
:52:47. > :52:52.and a few showers likely as well. Can you see the extent of a cloud