01/09/2011 Newsnight

If the Government gets its way, it is going to become a lot more

difficult to say no when developers decide they want to build on the

countryside. Is it change in the planning laws way to national

prosperity, jobs and happiness, or a way to splatter car bungles all

over the face of a much loved countryside. The plan to let

builders loose on the land has set the Conservatives against

conservationist, and cast Liberal Democrats as enemies of local

democracy. Is the coalition planning for the future or selling

out to commercial vandals. The chairman of the national Trust is

here to sort out the planning minister. Gaddafi remains defiant

as NATO bombs his remaining strongholds in Libya. And the

National Transitional Council goes to Paris to be anointed by world

leaders. We pay tribute to your bravery, and to the many who have

lost their lives, or have been injured. But as has been said, the

struggle is not yet over. And how, ten years after September

1th, the toxic dust from the Twin Towers ensures killing and sicks

goes on. One morning he didn't go round, I went up to check on him,

and I found him dead on the floor. This country is crawling is

hysterical, nihilistic people, according to the coalition

Government, they include the members of the National Trust,

Friends of the Earth, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds,

and the Bat Conservation Trust, these deranged organisations, are

furious at plans by the Government to allow concrete to be laid in the

countryside. The coalition propose that is the plan authority, should

in future, abandon the principles of the last 60 years, and be biased

in favour of developers. First we report from Gloucestershire.

This is Slad Valley in Gloucestershire, which inspired the

classic book Cider with Rosy, by Laurie Lee, now it is at the centre

of planning dispute with implications for the entire country.

It is about four dozen houses that could go up on these fields on the

one hand, but on the other, it is who makes weather in terms of

planning, local politicians or property developers. The bucolic

Slad Valley has become a test case, you could call it "Decider with

Rosy". Newsnight met some of the locals, who are resisting plans by

Barrett Homes to built 48 hourss in the valley. It is an area of

outstanding - - 48 houses in the valley. It is an area of

outstanding beauty, it is a haven for wildlife, apart from a beauty

spot that attracts tourists and visitors to the area. The planning

minister says people like you are exhibiting a nihilistic character.

In my great grandfather's day, for 20 years it was all I knew of the

world. Part of the charm of this world was it seemed untouched by

modernity, but developers hope to go construct rather more than cart

track in places like this, are making plans against the back drop

of a new Government document, released just a few days ago. Which

says there should be a: The local council which has a

Conservative majority of one, has rejected the proposals from

Barretts Homes, one member of the authority said ministers hadn't

explained the new planning dispensation. This may not be what

they are intending to do to alarm people, but they need to come and

make things much clearer. If they are not intending, I think a lot of

people think they are just going to intend to swamp people with a lot

of housing. If this isn't their intention, and I don't think it is,

they need to make it clearer. are doing bad job of selling a

policy? Yes, I suppose so, really. Barbara Tait isn't the only one

with a long face. Many other Tories, and Liberal Democrats, are thought

to be uneasy about the proposed changes to planning. And an

unprecedented alliance of conservation groups and

environmental groups are lining up against them. But many say more new

houses are badly needed. Most experts reckon we need between

perhaps 250,000-350,000 new homes in Britain if we are to meet

housing needs, we are way off that. We think the planning plans are

part of the measures needed to address the housing shortage, and

ensure everyone gets a decent home. A shortage of housing stock was

alsos cited by Barrett Homes, for their so far frustrated plans for

It doesn't hurt the objectors' case that they a invoke the name of

Laurie Lee, the great countryman, it is not hard to know which side

he would be on. But concrete on his beloved valley, that would be like

taking pesticides to Wordsworth's Lake District. This stained glass

window, in celebration of Lee and his writing, will be dedicated at

his former parish church later this month. For now it won't be rattling

in its putty, as trucks and JCBs go down the valley. But the builders

eying Le, he's own home, are appealing the council's decision, -

Le, he's own home are appealing the council's decision. There is a lot

at stake inside the Rosy's country, the apple of a developer's eye.

With us to discuss this is the plan minister, Greg Clark and Simon

Jenkins, chairman of the National Trust, one of the organisations

campaigning against the Government's proposals. You say you

want to consult, if the vast majority of people with whom you

consult say there should not be a presumption in favour of the

developer, are you prepared to abandon that? Of course we will

listen to all the voices. We have been clear for a long time we think

it is important to simplify the planning system. My question was

whether you would listen, if the majority of people said you should

bane done the presumption in favour of the developer, you will drop it?

I'm not giving the answer before the consultation. We don't know

what the consultation will tell you, I'm interested to see how serious

you are taking it? It is important to simplify the planning process,

and have this presumption, how the presumption is expressed is an

important aspect, and we will take views on that. What is important,

and from your package there, is the land there would not be affected by

these proposals f it is protected landscape it would continue to be.

When you start using words like "nihilistic selfishness", or Vince

Cable talks about people being "semi-hysterical", what is the

reason or excuse for that sort of extreme language against people who

merely care what the countryside looks like? That was a quote from a

paper that quoted me saying quite the opposite, for people to say we

should have no development whatsoever, not to build the houses

we need for the future, in my experience, doesn't happen. To that

would-be selfish, and nihilisticically so if it happened,

my experience is most communities recognise the needs of the future.

You found this in your book, The English People. You recognised, I

seem to remember, when it came to parish council, that people who

lived in villages do care about the future, want to keep their pubs

alive and their families housed. How long has it been the policy of

the National Trust to oppose development and greater prosperity

for people? This is not about growth. There is a chronic shortage

for rural land at the moment, nor is it about housing, there are a

third of a million houses waiting to be built. There is no shortage

of brownfield sites. National Trust is in favour of development, we do

a certain amount of it ourselves. The issue here is the nature of the

release of countryside in 65% of Britain, that is still ordinary

countryside, unprotected, and it is now highly vulnerable under this

plan. I am afraid the truth of the matter is, this plan is not

Government legislation. This is one of those case where is a group of

lobbies have got away with murder and they are laughing all over

their face at the moment. Why have you chosen to conduct this so-

called consultation in the dog days of summer and ending just about the

time parliament resumes its proper business? That is very long

standing commitment, we published a green paper 18 months ago in

opposition. We put a call for evidence out in January of this

year. We have got a three month consultation, I have asked the

select committee in parliament to scrutinise it. It is not going to

be adopted until next year. So there is a lot of time. Did you

write this document? Did you write it Greg? Of course I did, yes.

There are 360 references to business development in planning

law, there are four references to the countryside. It is the most

biased document I have ever seen. It is not planning document, it is

a lobbying document. That is not true, if you read it in detail.

has read it in detail, he has given you a word count. I invite viewers

to look at it. You will see the protection for the green belt is

there. I'm not a nihilistic person, we are in favour of simplification,

the planning laws were often ludicrously diligent, no question

about that. A lot of land can be taken up for development no,

question about that. What is extraordinary about the document,

is the document might have been written by the British Property

Federation, and I rather suspect it was, they are laughing all over

their faces, they can't believe their luck. You have written a dud

document, it badly needs redrafting? The document was put

forward in response to the consultation that we made through

the call to evidence, and actually we had contributions from

environmentalist, from people interested in historic environment,

from people in social housing. We had a spokesman earlier. The

planning system brings together all of these different groups, these

people who depend on the planning system functioning. We agree that

the planning system has become lost in translation. It has become

excessively long and complex. I think we can agree it nids to be

simplified. I look forward to the response of this consultation, to

have a forensic look, if you are taking 1300 pages to 52 I'm sure

not every sentence is expressed with the clarity that it might be.

I have great respect for the National Trust and will take

seriously these contributions. is at the moment unacceptable, it

will be a license to every Swampy, every lawyer, every shouter, there

will be one row after another about this. It is because it is the badly

drafted piece of law. The planning bar at the moment can't believe

their luck. All this is because you have produced a dud document. I

would love it to be a good document. But please, please, take the

consultation seriously. I do take the consultation seriously. But the

context of this is this is giving power to local communities.

have refused the opportunity to say whether you will change your mind

on the basis of the consultation, how can you possibly be taking it

seriously? I do take the responses seriously, we will look at them

carefully. You have declined to say you will change your mind on the

basis of what you have been told? What been told by the social

housing providers, and people who have represented the countryside,

such as the farmers and the country land association, that this is

crucial for the rural environment. So of course we will consider these

views. All the people want development, the development they

want is housing or warehouses or supermarkets. The only lobbies you

found on your side are the people who want development, including

farmers, I may say. What is extraordinary, I love the localism

bit in the Localism Bill, it is good stuff, you ruin it in the

planning framework, by saying, in effect, if a developers wants

something, and a local community doesn't want it, the developer will

win. That is not true. It gets rid of the imposition from above and

gives the final say to local communities. Why do you refer to

Government planning policy constantly throughout the document.

Government planning policy is pro- development. Because this is a

statement of national policies that sets out protection for the green

belt. Have you thought there might be something wrong about a policy

that manages to incite the detestation of the National Trust,

the Woodland Trust, the mammal - mammal Society, the Open Spaces

Society, the Bat Conservation Trust. Has it occurred to you you might be

wrong? I think they are reading more into it than they should. The

protections that are there, for the environment we all love and cherish

are very strong. I look forward to sitting down and going through it

in detail. You yourself don't even believe t when it comes to your own

backyard you don't believe in building over the countryside. We

know you think where at all possible all developments should be

on brownfield sites? That is what you said in 2008? Of course

communities will want to bring in brownfield sites. When there was

proposals in your constituency, you said where possible developments

should be on post industrial and brownfield sites. He did say that.

It has been ended. Mew view is these decisions should be taken by

local communities, I think local communities will want to bring into

use derelict land, first, we shouldn't impose from above

requirements. If they wanted to, this is something I have fought for

in my constituency over many years, if they want the leafy aspect of a

town and preserve gardens in towns and rather make a choice to bring

into use a piece of land that might be at the edge of town by a roadway,

in order to keep leafy gardens within the towns, that should be

something open to that community. Why have you ended the presumption

in favour of developing existing derelict sites. The previous

presumption in favour of housing and development going on to what is

called brownfield sites, which are more derelict and empty sites than

ever before in Britain because of recession, that is ended. There is

a clear expectation that council should bring back into use derelict

sites. Colonel Gaddafi is still at large tonight, and a little earlier

tonight popped up again, as he does, talking about setting Libya ablaze.

He spent the 42nd anniversary of his coup somewhere in hiding.

TRANSLATION: I tack them with rifles, with bullets - attack them

with rifles, with bullets, let them speak, let it be a long battle. We

will fight from place to place, from city to city, from mountain to

mountain, let us shout at them they can't rule the Libyan people. Let

it be a long trial until the victory. While the colonel was in

full flow, the Friends of Libya, as they are officially known, were

gathering in Paris to meet the heads of the revolution that has

unseated him. 60 nations recognise the National Transitional Council

as the Government of Libya. Everyone from America to the

Palestinian Authority, including the newest member of this club,

Russia, who announced their membership today. Even the Chinese,

who once thought that no-one had any business protecting Libyans

from that nice Mr Gaddafi. The meeting was about to - how to

rebuild the country, of which all now claim to be sponsors.

David Cameron said tonight the early signs from Libya are

incredibly impressive, he said that NATO operations will continue as

long as they are needed, and those who have committed what he called

unspeakable crimes will be brought to justice. His overriteding theme

is that Libya will - overriding theme is that Libya will not become

another Iraq, and that the NATO intervention, the military campaign,

the bombing by Britain and France, has been fully vindicated. Last

time we met here in Paris, Gaddafi's tanks were at the gates

of Benghazi, and Gaddafi was openly vowing to hunt down and kill his

own people, as he called it, like rats. Massacre loomed. Five months

later, the Libyan people have taken their country back. Taking their

country back, but offer 4 years, what will they do with it after 42

years, what will they do with it. This conference is supposed to be

all about securing the peace and securing that future, that might be

more tricky than ousting Colonel Gaddafi.

They rolled up in their grand cars, each nation flying its own flag,

making its presence clear. 13 heads of state, 19 premiers, and

ministers and diplomats by the score. These are the Friends of

Libya, turning a page in the day's favoured phrase "opening a chapter,

and hoping for the best". This is the day the new leaders of Libya

introduced themselves to a wider world. A world where everyone seems

to have their own reasons for casting themselves as friends of

Libya, a world in which the new leaders of Libya, need all the

friend they can get. - all the friends they can get.

This is a North African born academic, who has lectured on Libya

politics in Europe and the US. He has watched the discussions here in

Paris, when they have yet to enter their own capital, Tripoli.

They don't have any legitimacy, they were not elected. It is so

Arabic. Why do you say it is so Arabic? Because for them it is

always running for the support of the western countries. And in a

certain way, in my vue, there was a complicity of western countries -

view, there was a complicity of western countries, about what

happened for 50 years in this area. Without the support of the western

countries, they never can stay for 42 years. History has to be buried

as well? Of course. The RAF were in action yesterday, their bombs and

flares assisting the anti-Gaddafi forces. In France, President

Sarkozy, is hoping the success of the Libyan mission, will also help

his election campaign. Even some of his oppont ponnents believe his

motivation - opponents believe his motivation goes beyond that, recent

history recalls the war in the Balkans. What did not happen in

time in Bosnia, when the city of Srebrenica, was emptied of its male

inhabitants, who were subsequently destroyed, when faced with a

similar contingency in Benghazi, when Gaddafi promised to chase the

rebels like rats in the city, there was the opportunity to demonstrate

that what the previous generation had gotten wrong, this generation

was going to get right. Indeed tonight, President Sarkozy spoke of

what he considered the great success of the Libyan intervention,

with the horrors of what happened in Yugoslavia. TRANSLATION: What we

wanted to see was a policy backed and authorised by the United

Nations, which puts military might at the service of protecting

civilians populations likely to be massacred and martyred by their own

leadership. There have been tens of thousands of lives that have been

spared in Libya, thanks to this intervention.

In the Megreb itself there is apprehension about what has

happened in Libya. In these uncertain days they are seeking

guarantees, assurances, that the fighting will stop at the borders.

They have to give some assurance to the neighbour, Tunisia, Al Goreia,

Egypt, that this destablisation is not going to spread around them.

Especially in Algeria. The risk exists. You never know, but there

are 150 tribes in Lybia, it is not nation. What unites all Libyans

today is need. The first �140 million of Libyan bank notes was

flown in from the printing plant in the UK. It was Libya's own cash

frozen by sanctions. There is billions more where that came from,

and it can't arrive quickly enough. That sense of urgency was reflected

in the comments of the UN Secretary-General in Paris tonight.

The immediate challenge for us, for the international community, is how

to address humanitarian challenges. Roughly 860,000 people have left

the country since February, including skilled workers. Medicine,

food, and particularly water, are in short supply. There is a major

crisis on this matter. How confident are they that what

was agreed today will stick? think everybody knows that there

are potentially very serious divisions here. President Sarkozy

was asked with David Cameron, why he and his friend, Dave from

Downing Street, hadn't actually gone to trip trim themselves. They

tried to laugh it off - Tripoli themselves. And they tried to laugh

it off and say they will go when they are invited by the

transitional council will invite them. Nobody mentioned that the

people from that council themselves had yet to venture into their own

capital city. This is tricky. are events going down in Libya

tonight itself. We're in Benghazi. What's the word? Well, obviously

most people here in Benghazi are delighted by the symbolic aspect of

this conference, and maybe that is the most important aspect, the

welcoming of Libya's new leadership into the international community.

Beyond that, a senior figure in the National Transitional Council this

evening gave me a long and very interesting list of what he thinks,

and what the council thinks, Libya needs first in terms of practical

help. He talked first of all about administrative and technical help

getting the economy and the oil industry going again. They think

that can be done within three months. Help in training the police,

because although the new Libya has firmly rejected the offer of

foreign boots on the ground, it is very worried about law and order.

It is worried that police are only capable at the moment of serving a

dictatorship, not a democracy interestingly, he also talked about

help in recording human rights abuse, because they are convinced

they will find more mass graves of Gaddafi victims. That said, and

that's already sounding part of what would be a colossal task in

rebuilding, it is important to say that Libya does have some

considerable advantages compared to some other post conflict countries,

not only the oil industry, but also a very sizeable and educated

middle-class and many people, as Ban Ki-Moon referred to, gone away,

but many coming back, skilled emgreys, and want to go serve the

country again. We're joined by Ban Ki-Moon's adviser responsible for

the conflict in Libya. I gather you are off to Libya? I hope to be in

Tripoli on Saturday. What is your job there? This first visit will be

to continue discussion that is we have been having with the National

Transitional Council about exactly what role they want the United

Nations to play. Secretary-general Ban Ki-Moon, and those of us on his

delegation, had that discussion here today in Paris, with Chairman

Jalisco, and Dr Jibril, that followed on earlier discussions I

had. We want to be sure whatever the UN does corresponds to Libyan

wishes, and needs as we understand them on the ground.

How strange is it that the National Transitional Council is anointed in

France but failing to set foot on the ground in Tripoli? Several

members of the National Transitional Council are in Tripoli,

and have been for some time, including a deputy Prime Minister

and other ministers of the council. But I'm not sure exactly what the

latest plans are for the top leaders of the National

Transitional Council to go there. When they do they will start a

process in which they have already made some time-bound commitments,

as to when elections will take place. And one of the issues they

have made most clear today and previously, is they are looking to

the United Nations for support, is in the unfolding of an electoral

process, a process in which constitutions will be adopted and

endorsed by a referendum. You may have heard this in private

conversation, but it wasn't public today, this question of the eight-

month timetable before the re- elections, that didn't seemed to be

mentioned today. Was it privately, are they still sticking to that?

didn't discuss the timing, but the National Transitional Council,

there is in writing, they have adopted a covenant that it has been

their intention to prom mull gate an interim constitution on the

formal day of declaration as they put it. What will be the main task

for the UN in Libya? Electoral support is one of them, also

transitional justice, the difficult balance they will have to strike,

between accountability within the law for the most serious human

rights violations, compensation to victims, but on the other hand the

need for national reconciliation, and more broadly, the kind of human

rights and rule of law area. Then, of course, there is a huge agenda

of economic recovery. Today there were many offers of assistance

around the table in Paris. But both the major international actors, and

the Libyans themselves, have made clear that they want the United

Nations to take the lead in co- ordinating that. Co-ordination is

really very important in a post- conflict situation. We probably

have more mistakes than positive experiences to learn from in recent

post-conflict context. You are confident, are you, that they have

a coherent plan that they will stick to? They certainly have plan.

One can't say that is not going to be subject to further discussion.

Because indeed one of the first things that they are committed to

is expanding the base of the National Transitional Council

itself. Which will serve as the sort of first body designating

within 30 days an interim Government. And they themselves are

saying, and everybody in the international community is saying,

it is extremely important that council is as inclusive as possible

of different sections of Libyan society. So I think there are some

decisions to be made there, first. In the meantime, they have,

effectively, to rebuild the entire apparatus of Government, haven't

they? I wouldn't go so far as that. They are very clear that one lesson

they have learned from Iraq, or reject any general comparisons with

Iraq, is the mistake that is made if you do try to disband, wholesale,

existing institutions. Whether it is the security forces, or the

public administration. So I don't think they intend to do that. But

the problem is, although there was some institutions in Libya, the

national oil company, the Central Bank, that were run by extremely

competent technocrats, loot of the other institutions of an

accountable democratic state have run efficiently. That applies to

elections, there is no living memory of elections in Libya.

Next week we will see the 10th anniversary when out of the clear

blue sky two airplanes were flown into the world trade centres in New

York City. Over 2,000 people perished. The Twin Towers released

a cloud of toxic dust that blanketed Lower Manhatten and

Brooklyn and New Jersey. Over 18,000 people have received

treatment for World Trade Center related illnesses. More fatalities

are expected. We report now from New York.

A sight that has become the definition of terror. The

destruction of the Twin Towers. An onslaught that killed nearly

3,000 people. But ten years on, the attack isn't over.

The dust that overwhelmed the streets of Lower Manhatten, became

a weapon. The clouds contained particles of pulverised concrete.

Asbestos, lead from 50,000 computers. Murky from countless

light bull - mercury from countless lightbulbs, a poisonous legacy,

Jeff Endean is one of those who breathed in that dust. Today he's

seeing one of his doctors, Mike Crane, at New York's mountsi nigh

hospital. - mountsi nigh Hospital. He has coughing fits like this all

the time. A police officer, he was at Ground Zero for three months,

first searching for survivors, then clearing up remains. This is a

regular check-up. The dust has exacted a heavy price.

Jeff used to be highly active, an expert in firearms, his health has

collapsed and he's now retired. We first met him and his wife Eileen

at their home in New Jersey five years ago.

I have scaring on my lungs, plural thickening, some kind of leisons, a

reactive airway disease. Today another battery of tests. According

to a recent study, emergency responders are suffering from

reduced breathing capacity, and they are not getting better. Take a

breathe force it out, keep blowing, keep blowing, inhale quickly, take

it out of your mouth. Are you OK?

Uniform staff, like Jeff, were on the frontline. Police, firemen,

medical workers. Here is were the people the world saw battling

through the wreckage. But out of sight, beyond the cameras, was an

army of people toiling in the dust as well. Telecoms engineers,

contractors and cleaners. The latest official US Government

figures show that just over 60,000 people are now registered as being

at risk from inhaling the dust. Most of them are emergency workers.

A staggering 18,462 received medical treatment in the last 12

months. A number that's steadily rising. We still have new patients,

new bona fide genuine responders, who we have never seen before,

never been examined by a programme before, walking in the door every

day. We have 100-200 a month coming in. The word "dust ", itself,

sounds so innocent. So why exactly was this mixture so hazardous, and

why did it trigger such a huge impact. This scene was found in a

home close to Ground Zero, thousands of local residents were

vulnerable to the dust. The teddy bear was spotted by scientist,

loyal loyal loyal, while he was gathering - - by a scientist while

he was gathering samples. He and his colleagues examined the dust,

it was like nothing they had ever seen before. It was a collection of

different materials. Both buildings collapsed, there was cement, in

addition there was glass fibres, which basically were due to the

disintegration of 110 stories of glass, on each building. On top of

that you had residuals from the jet fuel, which basically bathed the

dust as both structures fell. mixed in there was a very long list

of toxins, asbestos, known to cause lung cancer, dioxins, notorious for

damaging the immune system, and dozens of others, like PCB, all

dangerous. But how do we know they are to blame? Well, at Mount Sinai

Medical Centre in Manhattan, they are seeing growing evidence. This

is the largest of the monitoring and treatment programmes. It is

where thousands of patients are seen. It is where a link between

the dust and their health looks more and more plausible. Even to

experts who first doubted it. on I wasn't convinced that we would

have chronic disease out of this. In a very short period of time,

weeks after 9/11, I was totally convinced. Absolutely and totally

convinced, and I remain so today, more so than ever.

Overshadowing all of this is a grim question. Whether inhaling the dust

We travelled south, out of New York City, to the home of a family with

bitter experience of the dust. James was a New York detective, a

popular figure, a non-smoker, the winner of numerous police awards

and a father. He worked at Ground Zero for more than 400 hours. Soon

his health declined dramatically. He became so ill he had to move in

with his parents. His father, is a retired police chief. He made sure

his son took his medications. But then, one morning, five years ago,

Joe went to wake his son. morning he didn't come out. I

waited until 9.30, and then he didn't come out. So I went up to

check on him. I found him dead on the floor. He was dead on the floor.

They took him away, and he was so young. I even said to the police, I

said see if you can get an autopsy done on him. They said coroner

already said he would do an autopsy. He's not going to sign a death

certificate until he does an autopsy, because he was so young,

and he wanted to know why he passed away.

The funeral, in January 2006, was a turning point. A pathologist

concluded that James Zadroga died of a rare lung disease, caused by

World Trade Center trust. The first official link between the dust and

a loss of life. The finding was disputed, but it also galvanised a

campaign for a new law, an act in James Zadroga's gaim name, to help

survivors - name, to help survivors. This weighty file is the Zadroga

Act, it is pages spelling out who is entitled to help. This doctor is

in charge of the file. He accepts that the world centre impact is

serious. Undoubtedly - World Trade Center impact is serious.

Undoubtedly there are people who have succumbed between the 9/11

attack and now. Do you think it is plausible that some people will die

of their exposure? Oh yes. I think that it is plausible to think that

way. So, yes, people could die of many of these conditions that we

have seen associated with the exposures.

So, ten years on, there is now, finally, official recognition of

the threat. But the fact that it has take be so long, is a source of

bitterness. There is a suspicion that the risks of the dust were

played down at the time. # God bless America

# My home sweet home Just one week after the attacks,

the New York Stock Exchange re- opened. A potent symbol of recovery.

Office workers, schoolchildren and residents were urged to return. But,

was this too soon. The dust was still everywhere. Scientists

carried out checks around Ground Zero. And the head of the

Environmental Protection Agency declared the air safe to breathe.

We're monitoring constantly, we have taken dust samples and, except

for one time, one sample, one reading, and that came from dust

from a car from the epicentre, we have not seen any reason, any

reading that is indicate a health has standard.

Christine Todd Whitman has always toad by that statement, saying the

finds - stood by that statement, saying the findings on air quality

were correct. We asked for an interview, but she declined. We

turned to one of her former adviser, were the authorities ignoring the

dangers to reopen Manhattan. He blames others for misunderstanding

what she was saying. Based upon the asbestos results, the area around

Ground Zero was safe except for the pile. There was the caution, and

the EPA did say there are other things in there we don't know about.

So I didn't find any fault with what she said, I blame the media, I

blame the officials in the Government for trying to put us at

ease much too quickly. Hopefully we learned something. As a scientist,

you know what's in the dust, would you have been happy to return to an

apartment near Ground Zero within a week? Yes, if I had a respirator on,

absolutely. Without one, would you have gone there?

The huge construction project at Ground Zero, gathers pace. A vision

of optimisim, in a city back on its feet. But among those who worked on

the rubble, a new fear is emerging, that the dust didn't only lead to

the illnesses we are seeing now, it is also causing cancers. That's one

reason why there is a legal battle for compensation. I think we will

be seeing new diseases develop, 20, 30 years from now. It is going to

be a long, long period where more and more people get sick over the

course of time. This is just the beginning, this is not ten years

out the end. We're going to be facing people getting sick with

9/11-related injuries, and illnesses for another 20 years, at

least. When you come to New York and hear

the words "lawyer" and compensation, and you would be for given for

being cynical, this is the most lit tiingous city on the planet. When

you hear one of their health officials saying he thinks more

people will die because of the dust that billowed over here ten years

ago, you realise this is a serious and growing problem. The whole

question of the health impacts of 9/11, aren't just relevant on this,

the 10th anniversary, they will be relevant for many more

Overlooking Manhattan, a memorial to James Zadroga, and a generation

born after 9/11. The attack won't be forgotten. Because for so many,

it is not over. Next week we will be reflecting on

how the world has changed in the decades since 9/11, culminating in

a special programme, with Kirsty, live from New York, next Friday.

Tomorrow morning's front pages now, the Telegraph reports that the

changes to the planning laws we were talking about earlier, would

result in about another 1,000 more major developments every year. The

Financial Times has a picture of Strauss Khan returning to his home.

Madonna is on the front releasing a film premiering yesterday, it was

said to be Morrisable than anyone To expect! Peter Twis died today,

the first man to fly at more than 1,000 miles an hour. He achieved

the feat in 1956. Delta two preparing for the flight that will