:00:14. > :00:21.Could this be the most compelling evidence yet of a phone hacking
:00:21. > :00:24.cover-up at News International, former royal reporter, Clive
:00:24. > :00:29.Goodman, claims hacking was discussed widely at editorial
:00:29. > :00:32.meetings, and said he was told he could keep his job if he didn't
:00:32. > :00:36.implicate the paper in court. shows how many people in the
:00:36. > :00:39.company were involved in phone hacking, a devastating piece of
:00:39. > :00:44.evidence. We will discuss what damage these allegations could do
:00:44. > :00:49.to News International and James and Rupert Murdoch. Four years for
:00:49. > :00:54.trying to incite a riot on Facebook last week. That was the sentence
:00:54. > :01:00.given to these two men in the Crown Court today. Rough justice? We ask
:01:00. > :01:04.a leading QC if the courts are getting it right? Also the
:01:04. > :01:09.extraordinary world of the 21st century slum and the lessons they
:01:09. > :01:17.hold for the west. People have built their shantys either side of
:01:17. > :01:20.this canal, it is only six feet wide in parts. We discover these
:01:20. > :01:26.Manila residents won't be cleared from their homes. We will fight,
:01:26. > :01:36.this is what we want, we will fight for our freedom. We will fight for
:01:36. > :01:37.
:01:37. > :01:41.our community. According to a letter by a former News of the
:01:41. > :01:44.World reporter, and published today by a Parliamentary Committee, phone
:01:45. > :01:49.hacking was rife at the News of the World, and discussed at the daily
:01:49. > :01:54.meetings. A letter by Clive Goodman, also alleges that the editor, Andy
:01:54. > :01:59.Coulson, offered to let him keep his jop if he agreed not to
:01:59. > :02:04.implicate the paper in court. As well as evidence from a cover-up
:02:04. > :02:07.at News International, there were serious questions raised about
:02:07. > :02:10.whether James Murdoch misled parliament over his knowledge of
:02:10. > :02:14.the extent of hacking at News of the World.
:02:14. > :02:17.In the News International version of events, many details thus far
:02:17. > :02:22.have been obscured, they have maintained throughout that the then
:02:22. > :02:27.News of the World editor, Andy Coulson, and other senior figures
:02:27. > :02:31.knew nothing about widespread illegal practices at the paper.
:02:31. > :02:37.The paper's royal editor, Clive Goodman, pleaded guilty to phone
:02:37. > :02:40.hacking and in January 2007, was imprisoned for four months. In
:02:40. > :02:43.parliament, the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee, has been
:02:43. > :02:48.pursuing this matter since 2003. At lunchtime today they announced they
:02:48. > :02:53.were now about to release some important new documents. Within the
:02:53. > :02:55.evidence that will be published at 1.00, there are some devastating
:02:55. > :02:59.revelations which will mean the company in general will have
:02:59. > :03:01.questions to answer. In amongst a huge shrew of
:03:01. > :03:08.documents released by the parliamentary select committee
:03:08. > :03:17.today, perhaps the most explosive is this, dated March 2007, it is
:03:17. > :03:20.from Clive Goodman, he is replying to a letter from News International
:03:20. > :03:24.telling him they are terminating his employment. He writes back with
:03:24. > :03:30.some serious allegations about just how widespread hacking was at News
:03:30. > :03:33.of the World. Mr Goodman complains the decision
:03:33. > :03:37.is inconsistent because other members of staff were carrying out
:03:37. > :03:41.the same illegal procedures. He goes on to say that the practice
:03:41. > :03:47.was widely discussed in the daily editorial conference, until
:03:47. > :03:50.explicit reference to it was banned by the editor. The editor, it is
:03:50. > :03:55.widely assumed tonight, was Andy Coulson. But further on in the
:03:55. > :04:00.letter Mr Goodman makes another, even more serious allegation. He
:04:00. > :04:03.says tomorrow Crone and the editor promised on many occasion that is
:04:03. > :04:08.he could come back to a job on the newspaper if he did not implicate
:04:08. > :04:13.the paper or any of the staff in the mitigation plea. He did not,
:04:13. > :04:18.and expected the paper to honour its promise to him. It is obviously
:04:18. > :04:23.a serious document. Elinor Goodman alleges that is in return for his
:04:23. > :04:27.sigh - Clive Goodman allege that is in return for his silence News
:04:27. > :04:31.International would look after him, and others were up to their necks
:04:32. > :04:36.in phone hacking. He also claims that the senior editor, Andy
:04:36. > :04:41.Coulson, knew what was happening. Here is the other strange thing, in
:04:41. > :04:44.amongst the huge pile of document, there was not just one version of
:04:44. > :04:50.Clive Goodman's letter to his bosses complaining about his
:04:50. > :04:55.dismissal, but two. With those serious allegation about hacking at
:04:55. > :04:59.News of the World, there came via the law firm that dealt with the
:04:59. > :05:04.unfair dismissal case. The other version had the details blacked out,
:05:04. > :05:07.in some cases missing all together. Who supplied this version to the
:05:07. > :05:10.committee? News International and James Murdoch. We asked News
:05:10. > :05:13.International to account for the discrepancy between these two
:05:13. > :05:17.versions of the letter, but couldn't get any official comment.
:05:17. > :05:20.In statement though, they told us that they recognised the
:05:20. > :05:25.seriousness that the materials disclosed and are working in a
:05:25. > :05:29.constructive and open way with all the relevant authorities.
:05:29. > :05:39.We learned today also of the payments made to Clive Goodman
:05:39. > :05:48.
:05:48. > :05:52.after his dismissal by News Why pay so much, the select
:05:52. > :05:55.committee wants to know, to someone who had been convicted of a
:05:55. > :05:59.criminal offence. As a former accountant and finance director,
:05:59. > :06:03.you should always follow the cash, the cash often leads to the truth.
:06:03. > :06:06.Whether that is trying to track down payments to police, or indeed
:06:06. > :06:10.payments to employees who have been dismissed. A lot of these things do
:06:10. > :06:14.need to be answered. Within six months of that letter being written
:06:14. > :06:18.by Clive Goodman, he received over �200,000 in payments from the
:06:18. > :06:22.newsgroup, and we need to try to understand why that is. If you
:06:22. > :06:24.don't believe a word he saying, why would you go and pay all that kind
:06:24. > :06:27.of money. Some members of the select
:06:28. > :06:33.committee are concerned they may have been misled over the scale of
:06:33. > :06:38.these payments to Clive Goodman. In late 2009, Rebekah Brooks admitted
:06:38. > :06:42.written evidence to the select committee, in it she said the
:06:42. > :06:47.payment to Goodman, and there was only one, she said, was less than
:06:47. > :06:55.�60,000, plus an unspecified sum to cover his notice period.
:06:55. > :06:59.We now know the real figure was in excess of �240,000.
:06:59. > :07:03.News International was still claiming that Goodman was a lone
:07:03. > :07:07.rogue reporter, but police had more information, Glenn Mulcaire, the
:07:07. > :07:12.private investigator used by Goodman, had 1 1,000 pages of notes.
:07:12. > :07:18.Police found an exmail to someone at News of the World from - e-mail
:07:18. > :07:26.to someone at News of the World marked "for Neville ", it was a
:07:26. > :07:30.transcript of a message left on the phone of Gordon Taylor, as they
:07:30. > :07:36.were not interested in the world of football, the implication is
:07:36. > :07:39.someone else at the paper must have been involved. In April 2008 Taylor
:07:39. > :07:44.was paid several hundred thousand pounds sanctioned by James Murdoch.
:07:44. > :07:48.Mr Murdoch has told parliament and others that he was not aware of the
:07:48. > :07:56."for Neville" e-mail at the end. When you signed off the Taylor
:07:56. > :07:59.payment, did you see, or were you made aware of the full Neville e-
:07:59. > :08:03.mail, or the transcript of the voicemail message. I was not aware
:08:03. > :08:08.of that at that time. In today's shrew of documents, a letter from
:08:08. > :08:18.Tom Crone to the select committee. Mr Crone was legal manager at News
:08:18. > :08:29.
:08:29. > :08:34.of the World at the time. He The final set of revelations today
:08:34. > :08:38.has come from News International's one time law firm, Harbottle &
:08:38. > :08:42.Lewis. They were asked by News International to go through some
:08:42. > :08:49.internal e-mails to see if Clive Goodman's claim of wider knowledge
:08:49. > :08:54.of the phone hacking stood up. They said they could find no evidence.
:08:54. > :08:58.Harbottle & Lewis claimed that this information was wrongly
:08:58. > :09:04.misrepresented as a full scale inquiry. This is James Murdoch from
:09:04. > :09:08.last month. It is a key bit of legal advice from senior counsel
:09:08. > :09:11.that was provided to the company. Today the committee has written to
:09:11. > :09:14.several previous witness, including James Murdoch, posing further
:09:14. > :09:18.questions. It seems likely that many f not all will be recalled to
:09:18. > :09:22.give further evidence. We asked News International on to
:09:22. > :09:27.the programme, but they didn't want to appear. Joining me now in the
:09:27. > :09:31.studio is former News of the World editor, Paul Connew, columnist for
:09:31. > :09:35.the Mail, Stephen Glover, and from Hull, the former deputy Prime
:09:35. > :09:40.Minister, Lord Prescott. How significant do you think these
:09:40. > :09:43.letters, all these documents are in the action with News International?
:09:43. > :09:47.Very significant. It is what a lot of us have believed for a long time,
:09:47. > :09:52.though denied by Murdoch. There was a conspiracy of silence between a
:09:52. > :09:57.lot of people at the top. When I hear them now contradicting what
:09:57. > :10:01.was said, why did they keep their mouths shut when all of us were
:10:01. > :10:05.fight to go show it wasn't a one- person operation. Murdoch's
:10:05. > :10:10.business philosophy is pay them off, as much money as you can, deny the
:10:10. > :10:12.evidence, make sure it looks as only one company, and then withhold
:10:12. > :10:15.information. Murdoch press have been involved in that from the
:10:15. > :10:20.beginning when a few of us were trying to stop it. The murd mur
:10:20. > :10:24.press will deny that. We have to - the Murdoch press will deny. That
:10:24. > :10:30.we have to make clear these are allegations by Clive Goodman, he
:10:30. > :10:34.was convicted and put in prison and found guilty of a crime, but this
:10:34. > :10:37.letter is quite self-serving, you have to admit? Those of us saying
:10:37. > :10:40.there was something wrong, the police were giving us the wrong
:10:40. > :10:46.information, the PPC hadn't investigated properly. They knew
:10:46. > :10:50.they had the e-mail of 2007, which said, what he was threatening to do,
:10:50. > :10:55.he was bargaining, he got paid off, they paid the money, what did they
:10:55. > :11:02.pay that for. Paul Connew, it wasn't proven they were paying him
:11:02. > :11:06.off. They agree he was paid, you heard in the production. I think
:11:06. > :11:11.Rebekah Wade thought it was �60 though, now we hear it is up to a
:11:11. > :11:15.quarter of a million. We don't know if they were paying them off or
:11:15. > :11:20.this the notice period they were paying off. Let me bring in the
:11:20. > :11:24.studio guests in London. He went to jail and committed the
:11:24. > :11:31.offence, I don't know any other employee gets that situation.
:11:31. > :11:37.without doubt an explosive moment in this whole saga. But it depends
:11:37. > :11:44.on whether Clive Goodman's letter is accurate. Now, quite clearly he
:11:44. > :11:49.was looking for the maximum payment possible. Could there be a veiled
:11:49. > :11:54.threat in that letter? There could be. Many media observers and former
:11:54. > :11:57.editor, including myself, have been sceptical about the idea that there
:11:57. > :12:03.was a lone rogue and people didn't know what was going on. At the
:12:03. > :12:07.moment, in fact, the only person convicted it Clive Goodman. The PR
:12:07. > :12:11.disaster for News International, and it has been for some time. But
:12:11. > :12:18.they don't really know precisely what Mulcaire has got. And there
:12:18. > :12:23.has always been cover-ups internally, we don't know who has
:12:23. > :12:26.misled who inside News International. Harbottle & Lewis
:12:26. > :12:32.believe they were misled in the parliamentary commity. There is a
:12:32. > :12:40.conflict in evidence, that is the company's lawyers. It is incredibly
:12:40. > :12:44.murky, this cannot be a good day for the Murdochs? It is, and mind-
:12:44. > :12:49.boggling involved. We may think we understand it, I have to put a
:12:49. > :12:53.towel round my head and I'm meant to make a living out of this stuff.
:12:53. > :12:57.Whether the dog or the duck remotely follows what is going on,
:12:57. > :13:03.it is not a good day for the Murdochm pyre, the story has
:13:03. > :13:07.advanced a bit - Murdoch empire, the story has advanced a bit, but
:13:07. > :13:13.there are some revelations. They will ask James Murdoch to come back,
:13:13. > :13:23.he can handle himself very well, he's a very shriek, some what
:13:23. > :13:28.slippery character. Who knows what will happen. I think we are
:13:28. > :13:32.advancing towards what we know in our hearts is that the News of the
:13:32. > :13:35.World was a dysfunctional paper, and there were lots of executives
:13:35. > :13:38.who knew what was going on. didn't write that to begin with,
:13:39. > :13:44.you disbelieved all the arguments that a few of us were trying to put
:13:44. > :13:49.up. Like most of the press they ignored it. What I said, and what I
:13:49. > :13:54.still do say, is that I don't think this is the most important story in
:13:54. > :13:59.the world. Isn't it the case that because t apart from it being going
:13:59. > :14:02.on for a long time. The people that have been affected are people, by
:14:02. > :14:05.and large, are people perhaps that can fight for themselves, but
:14:05. > :14:10.actually, the wider world, the great British public is getting
:14:10. > :14:15.less and less concerned about this? I'm not sure that's true. Some of
:14:15. > :14:19.them are making contrast, if you look at Twitter, two guys have got
:14:19. > :14:24.four years for using the social network to advocate riot, terribly
:14:24. > :14:29.wrong, no doubt about it, four yirs and we have been about five years -
:14:29. > :14:33.four years, and we have been about five years trying to get a company
:14:33. > :14:37.to admit it was involved in a criminal conspiracy. I have been
:14:37. > :14:41.involved in phone-ins over the last weeks and months. What is
:14:41. > :14:46.interesting is callers are pretty evenly de divided, a lot of they
:14:46. > :14:51.will feel there is a grave danger here that politicians are looking
:14:51. > :14:58.for way to actually control the press through statutory regulation
:14:58. > :15:03.and they don't like it. They want a robust press, even one that is
:15:03. > :15:07.flawed. If the public see that wrongdoing is going unpunished, why
:15:07. > :15:10.should they have any faith? There is a crisis of confidence in the
:15:10. > :15:14.public about so many cornerstones of democracy, press, politicians,
:15:14. > :15:19.and the police. There is no reason for people, if they have been
:15:19. > :15:22.guilty of wrongdoing to get away with it by phone hacking? I'm not
:15:22. > :15:27.suggesting that. There is a real public crisis of confidence here,
:15:27. > :15:34.and it goes beyond the press, the press is part of their
:15:34. > :15:39.disillusionment at the moment. you support the PCC, its role has
:15:40. > :15:46.been abominable. They have behaved badly, but I still believe in self-
:15:46. > :15:55.regulation, but with real teeth. In fact, a recent study showed that of
:15:55. > :15:58.the 25 countries with effective free press, 21 of them had self-
:15:58. > :16:02.regulation, only four had statutory regulation, and two of those are
:16:02. > :16:08.thinking of changing it. For the public to have faith in the press
:16:08. > :16:13.again, do you think there has to be regulation, or is self-regulation
:16:13. > :16:20.sufficient? Self-regulation will have to be tightened up. When Lord
:16:20. > :16:24.Prescott rails against the PCC, they didn't have vast resources and
:16:24. > :16:26.they were lied to by people from News of the World again and again.
:16:26. > :16:31.In those circumstances it is difficult for anybody, when the
:16:31. > :16:35.wool is pulled over their eyes, to go on. Where do you think it will
:16:35. > :16:40.go on from here, we know letters have been issued for clarification,
:16:40. > :16:45.and we know there will be more sittings on the 6th September. Are
:16:45. > :16:48.you saying you will keep pushing away at this for as long as it
:16:48. > :16:51.takes? I am pushing away at the courts, with the judicial review,
:16:51. > :16:54.the police didn't carry out their proper job. I want the courts to
:16:54. > :16:58.bring them in and explain why they didn't look at the evidence. What
:16:58. > :17:04.was the influence with the Murdoch press, I'm in that battle with one
:17:04. > :17:09.or two others. The PPC, we should have taken the 1997 solution, which
:17:09. > :17:13.was opposed by the press, was still a form of regulation but had
:17:13. > :17:18.sanctions. That is the way forward to guarantee some accountability of
:17:18. > :17:23.a press that is, frankly, out of control. Let's look at the what ifs,
:17:23. > :17:26.if it is found that James Murdoch did mislead parliament, is it
:17:27. > :17:29.conceivable he could run any part of the Murdoch empire? I don't
:17:29. > :17:35.think so, if that was established beyond doubt, that would be the end
:17:35. > :17:37.of James Murdoch. There is a wider question any way as to whether
:17:37. > :17:42.Rupert Murdoch will maintain control over the empire. A lot of
:17:42. > :17:48.people in New York don't like the fuss, who don't regard the British
:17:48. > :17:52.newspapers as particularly important, and think that Mr
:17:53. > :17:57.Murdoch is too involved. biographer has been talking about
:17:58. > :18:02.the fact that Rupert Murdoch is ready to sell News International?
:18:02. > :18:07.think James Murdoch's position, should Colin Myler and Tom Crone
:18:07. > :18:11.version be correct, then obviously he's an untenable position, and
:18:11. > :18:15.even Rupert Murdoch won't be able to...Why Didn't they say it before,
:18:15. > :18:19.when this is going on for years, Mr Myler said he inspected all the
:18:19. > :18:24.evidence and e-mails and he could say there is no other fd. He said
:18:24. > :18:29.that then when he - evidence, he said that then when he must have
:18:29. > :18:34.known that information? There is a dispute over who saw what. That is
:18:34. > :18:40.one of the great mysteries. It is unedifying when everyone is
:18:40. > :18:46.scrabling to save their skins? Absolutely, the other point is the
:18:46. > :18:51.public are very quick to point out it was the press that has actually
:18:51. > :18:55.exposed the phone hacking scandal. You mean the Guardian. The rest of
:18:55. > :18:59.the press kept quiet about it. Before we finish this conversation,
:18:59. > :19:03.I would like to bring one person's name into the frame who hasn't been
:19:03. > :19:07.discussed tonight, that is Coulson. Again, these are just allegations,
:19:08. > :19:14.for Andy Coulson this is extremely bad day? Yes, and for David Cameron
:19:14. > :19:18.too. A lot of people felt it was hostage to fortune with that
:19:18. > :19:23.appointment. Whether Andy Coulson is guilty of anything or not, it
:19:23. > :19:28.was still a very risky decision, and David Cameron must be rueing it
:19:28. > :19:33.tonight. Even if Coulson turns out to be innocent, and he is until
:19:33. > :19:37.proved guilty, we can all say it was a bad misjudgment on Mr
:19:37. > :19:42.Cameron's part. There were people telling him, I wrote to him in 2009
:19:42. > :19:45.in July saying it is unwise to appoint Coulson, I said you were
:19:45. > :19:49.the opposition at the time, and if you come into Government and
:19:49. > :19:55.appoint him as a civil servant, that would be terribly brong and
:19:55. > :19:58.reflect on his judgment. 2009 - wrong and will reflect on his
:19:58. > :20:03.judgment. It is beginning to do that now. The sentencing of people
:20:03. > :20:09.involved in the criminal rioting and damaging last week is carrying
:20:09. > :20:15.on. Two young men received a custodial sentence, after they used
:20:15. > :20:20.to Facebook to try to incite disorder in Warrington.
:20:20. > :20:27.The men of previous good character are going to jail for four years.
:20:27. > :20:33.Does the punishment fit the crime or are the judges overreacting to
:20:33. > :20:39.the riots. Here is our report.
:20:39. > :20:42.Justice has been swift, sentences stiff, the Government's tough
:20:42. > :20:47.rhetoric, matched by tough decisions from the courts. Today
:20:47. > :20:51.these two men were jailed for four years each, or inciting disorder on
:20:51. > :20:56.Facebook. Neither had previous convictions and no riots actually
:20:56. > :21:00.took place. The police had been monitoring what was being posted.
:21:00. > :21:05.The Assistant Chief Constable of Cheshire Police said tonight that
:21:05. > :21:09.social media had been used to incite behaviour that would strike
:21:09. > :21:16.fear into communities, the sentences are meant as a deterrent.
:21:16. > :21:21.In the wake of last week's looting, it is alleged that magistrates are
:21:21. > :21:24.to disregard normal guidelines and issue tougher sentences than they
:21:24. > :21:29.normally would. This is Hackney last week, looters running riot.
:21:29. > :21:34.Today, as you see, life is pretty much back to normal here. But
:21:34. > :21:39.plenty of young people now face court that has been sitting through
:21:39. > :21:42.the night and weekends. Unprecedented times, but are the
:21:42. > :21:48.sentences being meted out commensurate with the crimes.
:21:48. > :21:52.Government is taking it a bit too far. Giving people custodial
:21:52. > :21:57.sentences for theft, because it is actually theft, it is not burglary,
:21:57. > :22:01.and I think it is ridiculous, it is over the top. What the Government
:22:01. > :22:06.is trying to do is send a message out to all the other people so it
:22:06. > :22:10.doesn't happen again. I think some of them are too harsh, I heard a
:22:10. > :22:14.boy got sentenced for six months for stealing water worth �3.50.
:22:14. > :22:19.That is too harsh. I understand they should be punished. It is a
:22:19. > :22:24.bit extra really. It is not the bottle of water, but what you would
:22:24. > :22:27.have had, the effect it would have had on the people inside.
:22:27. > :22:31.support very strong sentences? if it will be a deterrent.
:22:31. > :22:35.Others told us the looters should be made to clear up what they have
:22:35. > :22:41.broken rather than be put behind bars, and not surprisingly
:22:41. > :22:44.differences of opinions here are echoed far way in the Westminster
:22:44. > :22:48.world. There are cases where offenders who have committed
:22:48. > :22:52.serious crimes should expect very serious sentences, that is what I
:22:52. > :22:57.expect to happen. But there have been some case where is people who
:22:57. > :23:01.have committed petty offences have received sentences which, if they
:23:01. > :23:05.had committed the same offence a day before the riots they would not
:23:05. > :23:11.have received a sentence of that nature. I think we need to be very
:23:11. > :23:14.careful of that, that this should be about restorative justice, in
:23:14. > :23:18.other words making people acknowledge the offences they have
:23:18. > :23:21.committed and preferably if the victims wanted, to actually sit
:23:21. > :23:26.down, face-to-face with the victims to hear from the victims the impact
:23:26. > :23:31.they have had, but it should not be about retribution. This is one of
:23:31. > :23:36.the most memorable images of what what happened in England last week,
:23:36. > :23:39.a furniture store in Croydon in flames. The MP for the area has
:23:39. > :23:43.strong views about how to proceed. We are seeing the sentencing people
:23:43. > :23:46.have wanted to see for years. I sent out an e-mail to all the
:23:46. > :23:51.people in my constituency that I have an e-mail address for, on
:23:51. > :23:56.Tuesday, I had over 1300 responses, there was a virtual unanimity that
:23:56. > :24:01.people wanted the courts to get tough with the people that caused
:24:01. > :24:05.the terrible criminality in Croydon. It will help people restore
:24:05. > :24:11.confidence in the justice system, and send out a clear message that
:24:11. > :24:16.this kind of disorder will not be tolerated. Over 1,000 people have
:24:16. > :24:19.appeared before the courts. With many more still to be processed,
:24:19. > :24:28.the controversy will continue over how they should be treated.
:24:28. > :24:32.I'm joined by the leading criminal barrister, John Cooper QC, and the
:24:32. > :24:36.Conservative MP for Stourbridge. The two men inciting violence, four
:24:36. > :24:39.years, a good decision? I wouldn't want to second guess the court and
:24:39. > :24:43.the judge. I wouldn't challenge the decision. The young men involved
:24:43. > :24:47.were inciting a riot, trying to organise a sort of mayhem that we
:24:47. > :24:50.saw on the streets eight nights ago in Salford. Which would have put
:24:50. > :24:55.lives at risk. And at the very least they distracted the police
:24:55. > :25:00.from trying to deal with that crisis. They put a lot of fear into
:25:00. > :25:05.people. At least one of them turned up at the site with full intention
:25:05. > :25:10.to steal and loot. Four years a reasonable sentence for that?
:25:10. > :25:13.I do think so, yes. A reasonable sentence, it was a serious crime,
:25:13. > :25:18.if they had incited violence there could have been mayhem, injuries
:25:18. > :25:22.and a lot of looting? All offences are serious offences, nothing I
:25:22. > :25:26.have to say can take-away from that. This sentence in my view is over
:25:26. > :25:29.the top. I anticipate it going to the Court of Appeal, and probably
:25:29. > :25:34.being overturned there. A lot of these sentence also they go to the
:25:34. > :25:39.Court of Appeal? I anticipate a lot will. What we need to remember is
:25:39. > :25:41.there is a protocol for sentencing, there are rules and procedures in
:25:41. > :25:45.sentencing which make them effective and fair. What we can't
:25:45. > :25:50.do, in my view, in situations like this, is suddenly throw the
:25:50. > :25:54.rulebook away, simply because there is a groundswell of opinion. We
:25:55. > :26:01.don't sentence people by virtue of a reality television programme or
:26:01. > :26:06.an X-factor, your contributor earlier on, one of the MPs, said he
:26:06. > :26:12.had contacted all his constituents and this is what they think. If
:26:12. > :26:16.sentences were based on that it would be a great reality TV show
:26:16. > :26:20.but not great justice. You are saying earlier on the judges are
:26:20. > :26:25.becoming hysterical, it sounds like a lot of people are hugely charged
:26:25. > :26:29.up and no wonder, in a way, because of the atmosphere? I don't think it
:26:29. > :26:34.is an overreaction, I think this time a week ago, eight or nine
:26:34. > :26:38.nights ago, this country was in had a terrible state. People lost their
:26:38. > :26:44.lives. Police were faced with unprecedented levels of violence
:26:44. > :26:49.from a mob. People were just going in and helping themselves to things.
:26:49. > :26:55.Certainly, in my lifetime, I don't think I have ever been as shocked
:26:55. > :26:59.and ashamed by anything in this country. Is the atmosphere
:26:59. > :27:02.different to before the riot, and you were talking about discounting
:27:03. > :27:06.sentencing in your own party, but people going for the maximum
:27:06. > :27:10.sentences, and you want judges to go for that? I have certainly
:27:10. > :27:14.argued for that, I respect your point that it is not up to the
:27:14. > :27:19.public or MPs as to what is a sentence in the court of law. I
:27:19. > :27:23.would hope that judges would air on the side of severity for cases like
:27:23. > :27:28.this. It is not for anyone else but the judges or the magistrates to
:27:28. > :27:35.make these decisions. When we hear that Government are telling judges
:27:35. > :27:39.and magistrates to sentence on a wholly different set of priorities.
:27:39. > :27:43.There is direction coming from the clerks of the court, but not
:27:43. > :27:46.politicians? Certainly there is a suggestion that an indication has
:27:46. > :27:49.been given. I certainly haven't heard the Home Secretary, the
:27:49. > :27:53.Justice Secretary or the Prime Minister try to second guess the
:27:53. > :27:59.courts and tell them what they should be doing. That is reashuergs
:27:59. > :28:05.to hear that, I am reassured. You were talking about the MPs
:28:05. > :28:08.hearing from constituents, isn't the job of MPs to reflect the
:28:08. > :28:14.public mood. If people are feeling insecure and feeling people should
:28:14. > :28:17.be put away for crimes, that if they are not put away for, may
:28:17. > :28:21.commit again quickly, you can understand why people feel insecure
:28:21. > :28:25.at the moment? I can absolutely understand why people feel insecure,
:28:25. > :28:30.and the emotion barely a woke after it happened, but it is part and
:28:30. > :28:33.process of the legal procedure to take a step back from this, and
:28:33. > :28:37.make sure justice administered isn't quick justice, but sound
:28:37. > :28:41.justice. Another point I would like to make. A lot of people at the
:28:41. > :28:46.moment who have been arrested, who would normally get bail, are not
:28:46. > :28:51.being given bail, but being held in custody, for reasons no other than
:28:51. > :28:55.the public mood is up. I think the reason is that they have taken part
:28:55. > :28:59.in a riot and put lives at risk. There is a difference between going
:28:59. > :29:03.into a shop and shoplifting something, that is a serious crime
:29:03. > :29:09.in itself, it is different to using violence and mayhem to create that
:29:09. > :29:14.opportunity. Some of these people haven't. Do you think we are in an
:29:14. > :29:17.atmosphere where you should revisit sentencing and make it tougher, and
:29:17. > :29:23.the road the Conservative Government started down was the
:29:23. > :29:27.wrong one, discounting sentences for a guilty plea? That was a
:29:27. > :29:34.consultation that the Government decided to not proceed with. I
:29:34. > :29:38.think we all know there is an issue with jail spaces, and the early
:29:38. > :29:43.guilty plea does have merit, and it is a current policy. But there was
:29:43. > :29:47.a feeling that 50% reduction was a step too far. Do you seriously
:29:47. > :29:51.think now, that people, the mood in the country is for tougher
:29:51. > :29:55.sentences? I think the mood in the country is for tougher sentences
:29:55. > :29:59.than we have had for many years. I don't think this is a product of
:29:59. > :30:03.the riots just. I want to make one point, one of the people on the
:30:03. > :30:10.preamble were talking rightly about restorative justice, and community
:30:10. > :30:13.payback. Cleaning up the mess they have created. These things are not,
:30:13. > :30:18.they don't contradict a prison sentence. There is no reason why
:30:18. > :30:25.you shouldn't serve some time in prison, and also give the victims
:30:25. > :30:29.of your crime restorative justice. It is estimated around one billion
:30:29. > :30:37.people live in shantytowns all over the developing world. That number
:30:37. > :30:43.is predcted to double by 2050. We are familiar with the slums in slum
:30:43. > :30:48.dwellings, at risk by typhoon and flood. There is a feeling that the
:30:48. > :30:54.shantys have a lot of positive aspects that we in the rich west
:30:54. > :30:59.could learn from. We enter the extraordinary lab brint world where
:30:59. > :31:05.people koufrpb - lab brint world where people often spend the whole
:31:06. > :31:10.of their lives. This is the Rice Belt of the Philippines, it is
:31:10. > :31:20.illusion, calm, idyllic. But more than one million people a year are
:31:20. > :31:21.
:31:21. > :31:30.leaving it. Poverty, climate change and a population boom are pushing
:31:30. > :31:36.people off the land. The places they end up in look like this.
:31:36. > :31:42.Half Manila's population live in slums. And the new global orthodoxy
:31:42. > :31:47.in urban planning says that is good. Slums are now Lorded as models of
:31:47. > :31:55.cohesion and sustainability. But here, they are the frontline in war
:31:55. > :32:00.between the rich and poor. They always look down on us as if we are
:32:00. > :32:10.just like a little on their eyes. They always refer to us as the
:32:10. > :32:13.
:32:13. > :32:23.eyesore of the society. This is the Estero de San Miguel.
:32:23. > :32:27.It is 600ms long, 600 families live on either side. Though it looks
:32:27. > :32:32.utterly temporary, it is decades old, and so is the pofrpt of those
:32:32. > :32:38.who live here. - poverty of those who live here. Mina, who has made
:32:38. > :32:42.her home in the slum, is about to show me how people survive here.
:32:42. > :32:52.And though I have been in slums before, I have never seen anywhere
:32:52. > :32:52.
:32:52. > :33:00.like this. It is like a mine. Just a tunnel, dark tunnel, and just
:33:00. > :33:08.people live off it, like a mine. The tunnel, less than four feet
:33:08. > :33:18.wide is the centre of their world. This is the queue for the bathroom.
:33:18. > :33:20.
:33:21. > :33:30.And this, the playground. This is the public space. And as for the
:33:31. > :33:33.
:33:33. > :33:37.private space? There is very little. So this is where you live.
:33:37. > :33:42.Three adults, a teenager and a child live here. It is clean, but
:33:42. > :33:48.the sleeping arrangements are cramped. Where do you sleep,
:33:48. > :33:52.upstairs? There. You sleep on the floor there. I sleep up, and
:33:52. > :33:57.husband and wife sleep there. while for some people, slums are
:33:57. > :34:07.just one stage on the root out of poverty, here most people are
:34:07. > :34:10.
:34:10. > :34:15.trapped. 20 years. You have been here 20 years. In this house?
:34:15. > :34:21.As I get further into the Estero de San Miguel, it is like seeing the
:34:21. > :34:25.worst of 18th century Europe. But why does this survive alongside
:34:25. > :34:30.skyscrapers, that, really, is the question I'm here to answer. There
:34:30. > :34:37.is a theory in the world that we can all learn from places like this,
:34:37. > :34:42.informal settlements, or slums, as we call them, it is true, there is
:34:42. > :34:47.social cohesion, and entrepeneurship, because if they
:34:47. > :34:50.didn't they would die. They are living inches from canal full of
:34:50. > :34:55.sewage, into which sewage is being thrown. I can't help thinking that
:34:55. > :34:58.the whole theory is a bit of a coppout. Why was it that the
:34:58. > :35:03.Industrial Revolution was able to clear places like this within a
:35:03. > :35:08.generation. And yet, in it the era of globalisation, we seem content
:35:08. > :35:12.to tinker with it. As I'm about to learn the answer is not simple,
:35:12. > :35:19.because without slum dwellers, many of our global megacities couldn't
:35:19. > :35:25.function at all. Clean your house, drive your car,
:35:25. > :35:35.clean your garden, take care of your baby, and if these people get
:35:35. > :35:39.
:35:39. > :35:46.out of the city the city will die. In a slum called Payatas, right
:35:46. > :35:53.next to a mountain of gash an, imcome to meet Father Nobilo, he
:35:53. > :35:59.thinks the slums are unclearable. In an age of scarce resources,
:35:59. > :36:04.there are lessons here for all of us. You don't need more as a human
:36:04. > :36:10.being to live. Because of the imbalance of having and not having
:36:10. > :36:17.is really vast, so what can we learn not only by the rich, but by
:36:17. > :36:23.everybody, how can you survive and manage scarcity and do little and
:36:23. > :36:28.do something. - have little and do something. What you notice in the
:36:28. > :36:35.slum is how organised things are, sports teams, church, women's
:36:35. > :36:39.groups, even the water fights have rules. Being in a place like this
:36:39. > :36:42.is a process of stripping away illusions, first that it is
:36:42. > :36:47.horrible, because it isn't. Second, that the women's groups and the
:36:47. > :36:52.Credit Unions can sort it all, because they can't. The fundamental
:36:52. > :36:57.problem is that in an era of land hunger, 98% of the people who live
:36:57. > :37:02.here, don't have the right to. And the Filipino Government has decided
:37:02. > :37:06.to clear half a million slum dwellers out of the city by force,
:37:06. > :37:16.if necessary. You really want live well if you smell sewage, how can
:37:16. > :37:26.
:37:26. > :37:33.you live well. Attention river warriors.
:37:33. > :37:39.The baby's water is clean. Meet Gina Lopez, she's on a mission to
:37:40. > :37:45.clear Manila's water slums and bring the rivers back to life.
:37:46. > :37:51.Her charity, the River Warriors, recruits local people to clear the
:37:51. > :37:56.slums, lay drains and patrol the place, to maintain order. Security
:37:56. > :38:03.around Gina is tight, because she's part of a powerful business family.
:38:03. > :38:10.They own the energy company, the main TV station, large chunks of
:38:10. > :38:13.downtown be Manila, she take as traditional view on slum clearance.
:38:13. > :38:18.There is a theory among some policy makers in the world, that we have
:38:18. > :38:24.to live with slums and accept slums. I don't agree, exclammation point,
:38:24. > :38:29.underlined and circled. No way, no way. Why does anyone have to live
:38:29. > :38:34.like that. I don't think any city can ever come up to its fullest
:38:34. > :38:39.potential if there are slums and people living like that. But, there
:38:39. > :38:42.is a problem, the clearance is compulsory, and once they have been
:38:42. > :38:51.cleared, some people have been coming back. Because, cities are
:38:51. > :38:54.where the jobs are. In Gina's helicopter, and with
:38:54. > :39:00.Gina's Chief-of-Staff, I'm off to see the place the slum dwellers
:39:00. > :39:10.have been moved to. It is 30 minutes, as the chopper flies, but
:39:10. > :39:11.
:39:11. > :39:15.more than four hours by road. Here density is not a problem. The
:39:15. > :39:22.problem is, there is no mains electricity, no prospect of ever
:39:22. > :39:32.getting any, and there are no jobs. The market traders have time to
:39:32. > :39:51.
:39:51. > :39:55.Come and visit Reuben, he came from the slum. Can I come in? Reuben
:39:55. > :40:01.came here straight from Estero de San Miguel. He likes it, the house
:40:01. > :40:06.is bright and solid, but there is still a problem. TRANSLATION:
:40:06. > :40:11.need factories here, people still go back to Manila to find work. We
:40:11. > :40:14.try very hard to earn money. Because if you don't, we could die
:40:14. > :40:24.of hunger. The Government accepts this is not ideal, but they are
:40:24. > :40:29.determined to go on demolishing the slums. Next on the list for
:40:29. > :40:38.clearance is the slum I first visited, Estero de San Miguel,
:40:38. > :40:45.where Mina has invited me back after dark. It is amazing, we're on
:40:45. > :40:50.a bridge, a yard wide, and here, people have built their shan'ties
:40:50. > :40:57.either side of this canal - shantys, either side of this canal, it is
:40:57. > :41:06.only six feet wide in parts. I love the people in this place, but how
:41:06. > :41:13.on earth do people survive? I think that is the ability of the
:41:13. > :41:17.Filipinos to be very adaptive. longer I stay in this place, the
:41:17. > :41:23.more my revulsion at the way people have to live gives way to my
:41:23. > :41:29.admiration of how they do it. And the tunnel itself is full of
:41:29. > :41:35.surprises. How is business, how is the shop going? She just graduated
:41:35. > :41:45.from college. You graduated from college, which college? Iris. Tech
:41:45. > :41:48.
:41:48. > :41:56.college kal institute. What did you study? Business administration.
:41:56. > :42:01.is doing my head in, I'm in economic, and I'm talking to a
:42:01. > :42:07.business graduate here. What do you think about the people who want to
:42:07. > :42:13.clear it out? The people who want to demolish us here, please don't
:42:13. > :42:18.do that, because...The Gist of it is we have invested all our money
:42:18. > :42:22.here, we like it here and it is all we really know. You have lived here
:42:22. > :42:32.from birth? Yes. Congratulations to you, many people could not do this.
:42:32. > :42:32.
:42:33. > :42:39.Thank you all, good luck with your shop. What is your name? Anis.
:42:39. > :42:45.I'm interested in all these guys in these uniforms, who are they?
:42:45. > :42:53.are my local councillors, and police officers. Police officers?
:42:53. > :42:58.They live also here. Who recruits them? Me. I organise them. I have
:42:58. > :43:02.20 local police. They have all got sticks.
:43:02. > :43:09.One of their main jobs is to protect the slum against arson,
:43:09. > :43:14.because, places resisting demoligs have a strange habit of get -
:43:14. > :43:19.demolition, have a strange habit of getting burned to the ground. I'm
:43:19. > :43:24.stood in the middle of a three-foot wide canal, eight dwellings either
:43:24. > :43:32.side of it, what is this? This is a computer shop. A computer shop in
:43:32. > :43:39.the middle of here? Yes, Sir. have, one, two, three, four, five,
:43:40. > :43:43.six, seven screens, somebody's on Facebook. Somebody's playing poker,
:43:43. > :43:49.and I'm gradually understanding how this settlement is liveable for
:43:49. > :43:53.people. In the space of 100ms, I have met
:43:53. > :43:57.three graduates, a semi-official police force and the social media
:43:58. > :44:04.revolution. With so much invested in this place, social capital,
:44:04. > :44:07.Tennessee, money, there is no - tennancy, money, there is no
:44:08. > :44:12.surprise why they don't want to leave. What will you do? We will
:44:12. > :44:19.barricade, we will fight for it, this is what they want, we will
:44:19. > :44:27.fight for our community. Some architects now think we can learn
:44:27. > :44:32.from slum, afterall, they are human habitats designed without the help
:44:32. > :44:42.of politicians. The measures of zoning and formallised urban
:44:42. > :44:43.
:44:43. > :44:47.planning, it fragmented our society. This is a world famous architect
:44:47. > :44:53.who wants to rebuild the Estero de San Miguel, based on the way the
:44:53. > :44:57.land is divided up at present. bridge to connect both
:44:57. > :45:01.neighbourhoods across the canal. That is an optimistic vision
:45:01. > :45:07.compared to what it looks like now. The slum dwellers support the
:45:07. > :45:13.scheme, and the plans are ready and the Government says it is too
:45:13. > :45:20.expensive. Would it not be better to clear it, however painful it is
:45:20. > :45:25.for them, would it not be better to clear it and start again? Since we
:45:25. > :45:28.have become an independent country it is the wrong policy, slum
:45:28. > :45:34.upgrading uproots them from the community. It is also a problem
:45:34. > :45:37.because they keep coming back, they are not assured of jobs where they
:45:37. > :45:44.are relocated. For now that is the approach, the fate of 6,000 people
:45:44. > :45:49.hangs in the balance. We used to think these place would
:45:49. > :45:54.disappear as the world developed. Instead, they have grown. With
:45:54. > :46:03.technology and education, people have found new ways to live in them.
:46:03. > :46:13.And millions of people are heading for them all across the world.
:46:13. > :46:28.
:46:28. > :46:33.That's all from Newsnight tonight, we leave you with the news that the
:46:33. > :46:43.iconic Chelsea Hotel in New York, which inspired residents such as
:46:43. > :46:44.
:46:44. > :46:50.Bob Dylan, and others, is being gentrified, to the horror of the
:46:50. > :46:53.Manhattan community, the sign says they are no longer taking
:46:53. > :46:58.reservations. # I remember you were in the
:46:58. > :47:04.Chelsea Hotel # We were talking so brave and so