12/10/2011 Newsnight

Worse than it's been for years, and likely to get worse still. Over 2.5

million without a job, and every It is sad because I know I'm a hard

worker, I do my best, it would be great to find a job. It's my

goal.If It is like this before the next stage of the economic crisis.

What on earth can be done? The bosses of big selling

newspapers come out fighting against further regulation. Both

Steve Coogan and Louise Mensch have been dufd up by the tabloids, but

both agree they have a case. The Defence Secretary continues his "am

I bothered" act, how much longer can he keep it up. I believe that

Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and the saviour of mankind. The front

runner for the Republican presidential nomination, tries to

overcome the criticism that he belongs to a cult. This Texas

Pastor will tell us why are Mormon - a Mormon is not fit for the White

House. There are more people out of work

in this country than at any time in the last 17 years. 2.5 million of

them, 8% of the work force. It is one thing to lose their job, it is

another type of misery again, to come out of education and find

society seems to have no place for you. The picture for youth

unemployment is especially bad. There are nearly a million young

people without a job. Paul Mason is here. You better give us the gory

details. As you say they are 8.1% unemployment, that is a 17-year

high. If we drill into the figures, youth unemployment, 21.6%, that is

getting towards south European levels of youth unemployment. And

there are about a million youth unemployed. Drill down even further,

of the jobs lost in the last three months, 178,000, the vast majority

were part-time. You start to see loads of women, loads of public

sector workers. If we do one more drill down, this is a problem for

the Government. Private sector job creation is up in the last three

months, public sector job losses, 111,000. What you have is a

beginning of a breakdown in the narrative. We were led to believe

the public sector job losses would be offset by the private sector job

creation. That is why the Prime Minister stood up and said this

today. I accept we have to do more to get our economy moving, to get

jobs for our people. But we mustn't abandon the plan that has given us

record low interest rates. The fact that there hasn't been the take up

predicted is to do with growth. Realistically, what can be done?

have already plan A plus, which is �75 billion of quantitative easing,

credit easing is proposed. That is the Government becoming a proxy

lender to small business, we think �10 billion if that ever happens.

That is long-term, the debate now in the Government's growth review

is whether you can do a big jolt a defibrillation of the economy.

There is a whole list of suggestions in tomorrow's New

Statesman, through correspondents the Government will respect. It is

massive tax cut, through VAT or business tax, or it is some further

or more radical version of lending direct to the public. There are

calls for state bank. There is a number of employers' organisations

thinking about a state investment bank. Ultimately I think the

Government cabinet this week discussed things like ripping up a

few European regulations. Let nothing get in the way of growth.

They have got to come up with something, this is a story of a

narrative slightly spiralling out of control. A lot of it is to do

with global conditions, conditions at least elsewhere in the world?

just happened to be the most globalised of the most developed

economies, so it is a problem. When the Government's original austerity

plan was thought up in November 2010, they thought there would be

growth in Europe and America, and our economy would rebalance,

becoming more export orientated and manufacturing orientated because

the demand would be there, but the demand is gone. And if it is

happening at all it is slow. That is the context in which the

political debate fakes place. Even business groups now - takes place.

Even the business groups, it is not the rabid left, even business

groups are saying let's have a demand stimulus quite soon, please.

If the prospects for young people in this country are bleak, imagine

what it must be like elsewhere in Europe. In Spain, for example,

youth unemployment is running at getting on for 50%. The world the

young were educated for no longer exists, that is before the

eurocrisis comes crashing through the door like some out of control

juggernaut. What started off as a Greek problem

has turned into a full blown European crisis. Are politicians in

Europe using a pea shooter instead of David Cameron's weapon of choice,

a big Baz sook ka. One thing is for sure, unless the big guns arrive,

the whole shooting gallery will collapse. Financial markets are

convinced that Europe's weaker economies simply won't be able to

repay all their debts. In an effort to do exactly that, European

Governments have slashed their deficits and forced millions on to

the dole queues. Of the three countries already getting a bailout

from the IMF and the EU, unemployment has soared, Portugal

has 12% out of work, Ireland 14%, and that's rampant job creation

compared to Spain's 21% unemployed. How does Portugal with the debt

mountain of 93% of national income aim to repay its debts. I was in

the position when the external assistance programme was asked and

negotiated. I stand in favour of that programme. I knew how the

situation was extremely difficult for my country. One of the

differences in the Portuguese story is we have a large political

consensus in Portugal about this programme and its obligations. 5%

of the Members of Parliament, despite the differences you can -

85% of the Members of Parliament, despite the differences between the

- Government and the opposition, are in favour of the deal with the

IMF and other institutions. Unemployment in the UK is at 8%, my

guess is the Portuguese Government would love that level of

unemployment? It is true, I would love to have that unemployment

level. The eurozone would love if it only had an unemployment crisis,

apart from millions of people out of work, there is banking cry sai,

many of Europe's largest banks simply may not survive. Then there

is the issue of where the growth comes from. Even the strongest

economy, Germany, has stuttered to a stall in the last few months.

Then there is political paralysis, there doesn't seem to be any way

for European leaders to get around the table and agree a way forward.

That is what President Barroso is, at least, hoping to alleviate.

To that end, the EU commission President was hoping today to put a

proverbial bomb under eurozone leaders, for example, France and

Germany, to solve the crisis. strategy should comprise of five

key steps. It should include all potential systemic banks identified

by the European banking authority across all member states. It should

take account of all sovereign debt exposure in full transparency. It

should involve a temporarily higher capital ratio after accounting for

exposure. Banks that do not have the required capital should present

and then implement plans to have it in place as swiftly as possible,

and until they have done so, they should be prevented from paying out

dividends and bonuses by the national supervisors.

APPLAUSE Three years ago Europe's

Governments spent billions, hundreds of billions bailing out

their banks. That prevented a financial crisis turning into an

outright depression. The problem three years later, as we face

another financial crisis is that the Government simply don't have

the money. So when the IMF and the European Commission suggests

another round of mass recapitalisations, who will pay for

it? Where does the capital come from, from the private or public

sector. The Germans will stand behind their banks. The French have

said we are not sure we can stand behind our banks f someone else

could help us out that would be great. If the French do it on their

own they will lose their Triple A rating, if they lose that, the ESF

can't gear up to 400 billion to 3 trillion. If you don't have the

bailout fund, effectively zone as the ESFS, you can't put the money

where the mouth is. In many ways the banks are the cause and the

cure in this now the second financial crisis. In the boom times

Governments borrowed from banks, gave the money to tax-payers, and

they hoped would get re-elected. Now though, the banks want their

money back and the Governments don't have the money. Perhaps if

the banks consider writing off vast swathes of that debt, that would

get the Governments off the hook. The only problem is that would

collapse many of the banks. Is it fair that many countries are

talking about Greece having a bright off, or haircut of 60% of

its debts, when Portugal has to pay00% of their debts. I will give

you a diplomatic answer, we are focused fully on our commitments,

honour our word, and if we do it, we will do our job. I think this

will be recognised by markets and international communities. What is

the undiplomatic answer? Look, you have to wait. So, over the coming

weeks, are eurozone politicians prepared to lengthen dole queues,

strangle growth, and risk jobs to preserve a currency constructed in

a different era by a different group of leaders.

We are joined by our guests, John Micklethwait, and Julia Hodson, an

MEP who used to run - Guy Verhofstadt, a an MEP who used to

money Belgium. It is going to get worst isn't it? In my opinion the

economic fall-out of this debt crisis in Europe is happening. It

is not only affecting the eurozone, it is also affecting all the

members of the European Union. If you look for an example to the

figures, the fiscal deficit in Britain is higher than average in

the eurozone. If you look to economic growth, economic growth is

lower than the average in the eurozone. The same for the debt

ratio is higher than Britain than in the eurozone. I don't think you

can see that it is as a consequence of the euro, on the contrary. The

problem with the euro is we need as fast as possible to build up an

economic and fiscal union besides the monetary union. We understand

where you are coming from quite clearly at the moment, we will come

to the euro in a second. With the question of unemployment, it is

going to get worse, a great deal worse? Yes it is, both in Britain

and particularly in the European Union. Because whatever he says, at

the moment other economies around the world, China, America, they are

not actually worried about Britain, they are worried about the eurozone.

Indeed the whole world economy is worried about the eurozone. Unless

it actually begins to grow, and begins to actually deal with this

debt crisis unemployment will continue to get worse. How much is

actually in the hands of any individual Government, the British

Government, for example, leaving aside the eurozone for a moment?

The British Government is taking measures, and has taken measures to

reduce the effect of regulation on business, stimulate the private

sector. They are not having much effect, are they? We saw on the

report a number of private sector jobs have been created over the

last quarter, unfortunately it is not offsetting the number of jobs

lost in the public sector. You told us the growth would, you told us

losses in the public sector would be compensated by growth in the

private sector, that is not the case? There have been half a

million jobs created in the private sector in the last 12 months. I

don't think we could have forecast the scale of the lack of growth,

and the United States has growth worse than our's. All the export

markets are under considerable pressure. There is clearly problem,

you but I think the Government has some measures to influence it in a

positive way f not solve the outright problem. If the eurozone

is going to impact badly upon us, there is some argument, for us

making a stub substantial generous contribution to the European

stability fund? That is the argument, pay to play, I guess Guy

Verhofstadt will come in hard on that. The British, in order to have

a role in devising this new Europe, they will have to put in some money.

One argument is some British people might see is that would give us a

voice, and it would certainly provide a much more liberal

direction to the way in which gruls Brussels is going. Against that I

don't think - Brussels is going, against that I don't think the

appreciation would be for us coming in. What do you think of the

suggestion that the British should make some contribution, pay to

play? I would say it is a very good idea! I don't think it is very

realistic. Nevertheless, nevertheless, the reality is that

Britain has a huge interest in a sound eurozone. It should think

about helping to rescue the eurozone. But the way to rescue the

eurozone is a question of creating, as I said already, of an economic

and fiscal union. It is nonsense to have a single currency on the one

side, and then seven different economic strategies and Governments,

- 17 different strategies and economies and bond markets. We need

more European integration to rescue this. Spoken like a loyal Belgian!

I respectfully disagree. Yes, there will have to be more Europe than

there is at the moment. I think everyone pretty much accepts that

for the eurozone. There will have to be more. Yes, you will need some

kind of bugetry supervision, somebody who will just check if the

numbers are correct. And yes, you will probably need some eurozone

bank regulation to make sure they cover the whole eurozone rather

than just international stuff. Once you jump ahead to full fiscal union,

you run into all sorts of problems, not just intellectual ones, but

practical ones. You can't even persuade Slovakia to go along, even

briefly, on what is a huge deal. What will they think about it in

Stourbridge? I think the important thing is Britain won't be a part of

this closer fiscal unit. We are fortunate in that we are not in the

euro. We will not be a part of that. Nor will we be a part of the

bailout. Because we would have to borrow, wouldn't we, in order to

fund the weaknesses elsewhere. I think the flaw in the logic. I

understand the economic theory of closer fiscal union, to support the

single currency, the flaw is the democratic deficit in the argument.

As John was saying, Slovakia won't agree. Any country which has to

ratified the treaty from an electorate will find it very

difficult to get approval. Presumably you believe in the old

European practice to simply telling the Slovakians to go back and vote

again? Sorry, I didn't understand the question. I suppose you think

the Slovakians think they should have another vote until they come

to a conclusion you like? No, I think that we need to change the

rules in this European rescue fund. It is completely nonsense to

continue with the rescue fund based on a unanimity rule, as it is the

case today. Because that makes that one political party, in one of the

17 European members can block a rescue operation fund. I think we

need fight power in the rescue fund, if you want to rescue the euro.

First of all, by abolishing the unanimity rule in the rescue fund.

And secondly, also, this is very important, by increasing the money

that you put in the rescue fun. much? Let's be very honest. I think

we have to double at least, maybe to triple the money that is today

in the rescue fund, if we want really to stablise the euro. And

let me be say one thing as a conclusion, that is that it is the

financial markets today, and the stock markets, they were asking for

an economic and fiscal union, besides the monetary union. They

say if you want the single currency, you need one economic policy.

Very quickly from you two here. Barroso is talking today about 440

billion, the talk is of 1.2 trillion being needed, what is your

guess? My guess is 2 trillion. more? I think that sound like it

would tilt the balance against some of the stronger markets losing

their Triple A rating who will find this two trillion. We don't want to

throw the relatively healthy economies' babies out of the water.

You pitch it low, and you come in with an answer bigger than anyone

expects, you restore confidence. needs to be close to a trillion.

Biggest beasts of the media jungle were prodded out of their dens,

they emerged blinking and bad tempered, to put Lord Levenson

right on how the media works. The inquiry was set up when the phone

hacking story broke by the Prime Minister, the same Prime Minister

who put Andy Coulson at his press secretary.

They were bothered by three big questions, firstly, do we need a

new regulator for the press? Paul Dacre, editor-in-chief of the Daily

Mail, didn't think so. I would like to try to persuade this inquiry

that self-regulation, although a considerably beefed up form, is, in

a country that regards itself as truly democratic, the only viable

way of policing a genuinely free press.

Secondly, how can one guarantee that free press? Dacre thinks

commercial success is the only guarantor of freedom. I would argue

that Britain's commercially viable free press, because it is in hock

to nobody, is the only real free media in this country. Overregulate

that press and you put democracy itself in peril. Finally the

question of whether the Leveson inquiry was necessary at all. The

former editor of the Sun knocked that on the head. Why do we need an

inquiry of this kind? There are plenty of laws to cover what went

on. Afterall, 16 people have already been arrested, and my bet

is, the numbers may well go up to as many as 30, once the police

officers start being rounded up on the corruption allegations.

people who are quite familiar with coverage in the Daily Mail are here.

The last time Steve Coogan was on the programme, there was a most

disparaging piece about him in the Daily Mail a few days after.

And Louise Mensch MP, has also featured in that paper on topics

such as if she has had plastic surgery and her marriage. Let's

take the first question, self- regulation, does it, as was argued

by Paul Dacre today work? Manifestly it doesn't work in the

form we currently have. It was ludicrous of Mr Dacre to suggest at

some length there was no problem there whatsoever. We have to have

it massively beefed up and changed. It is entirely facile to say it is

all working great. Government regulation or self-regulation?

think you must have a free press, but some Government regulation.

papably failed in the biggest single test of its existing in the

last 12 years with the hacking scandal, it did nothing, the only

way it came to the fore, was the tenacity of certain celebrities and

the Guardian newspaper who pursued it. And fellow Eurotunnel

journalists operating under self- regulation? Those journalists are

to be applauded, I don't have a problem with them, it is those who

do the muck raking I don't like. you favour the second question that

came up, what is the guarantee of the free press, Paul Dacre arked,

plausibly, that the best guarantee of a free press is a commercially

liable press? A commissionly viable press a free press, led by the

market, has led to the hacking of Milly Dowler's phone and the

hacking of victims of crimes phones. You also get the Mail being free to

name the alleged murders of Stephen Lawrence? That is the one example

people use. Wasn't it a brave, good thing to do? It is notable by its

singularity. It is the one case that breaks the rule. All the Mail

are interested in, are its commercial interest. It is selling

newspapers, everything is based on who is shagging who. It is not

about trying to expose corruption. That is, as he explained today, was

a way of selling newspapers, it helped to sell newspapers and

carried the cost of the other stuff. That is not why this occurred, it

occurred because victims of crime have been hacked, and self-

regulation hasn't worked. It has come about because of the

abhoration. People broke the law? It was nothing to do with the Press

Complaints Commission that exposed that. You have been a victim of I

won't ask you whether you have had plastic surgery or Botox or what

you have been accused of. It can be hurtful? It can be, but we are

drawing a distinction between the pure tabloid press and the other

press. It was the Guardian asking me in an interview ostensibly about

my politics if I had a face lift and it was the strap line. That was

put there because it is fluff that sells papers. If we want the

Telegraph stories, you have to take it, because it gives you a chance

to put out what you think. You have to roll with the pitches?

depends on the degree. I think whether or not it invades prif vi,

I think they are unwitting stoodges of Paul Dacre and the Guardian

newspaper. I think the Guardian has to be ashamed, because the face

lift piece on conference is not talking about the policies from the

conference. That comes from the Guardian and they need to be

ashamed. I can talk about Corby being the fastest growing town at

the moment, but that won't sell papers, they are interested in

fluff. The circulation in all papers plummeting and we have to

have one that works. If newspapers exist to basically make money, and

the by-product is they occasionally do things laudible and publicly,

they make most of their profit from searching through people's rubbish

bins, then they deserve to go to the wall. Why does it hurt you?

is not about hurting. I'm not here for me, I'm here because of other

people, the not famous people, people who are defenceless, who

can't afford to go to the courts to defend themselves. The tabloid

journalist a few years ago said we ruin people's lives, that is what

we do. That is a rare moment of candour from one of the tabloid

newspapers. As far as you are concerned they can say what they

like about you, you are acting on behalf of others? It has to be in

the public interest. If I was someone, I don't think we should

roll with the punches, certain questions are legitimate, some

aren't. If I went around as a politician and said I was a par

gone of virtue and extolling family values, then my personal life would

be legitimate because I'm trading on it. I work in comedy, if it is

crap, say so, but my personal life has nothing to do with it. Would

Paul Dacre like if I looked in his bin or asked him what he got up to

in bin, it is none of his business. I think he's being disengenius Paul

Dacre, there were 1300 tran actions in his paper, he said people should

be free to et ex-directory phone numbers, it was shown by the

Independent that part of the blagging example was going after

the parents of the Dunblane children, and finding their ex-

directory phone numbers through blagging. That can't be justified.

We mustn't throw the baby out with the bath water f we make newspaper

reports only on good and worthy things, the sad fact of the matter

is people won't buy the newspapers. People by the Guardian and the

broadsheets. They are not making any money? If the tabloids can only

exist by reporting that kind of garbage, that is not a good enough

reason for them to exist. You would rather a free press disappear?

there are plenty of free newspaper that is don't indulge in that kind

of thing that report the news. Times is down 14% year-on-year

circulation. You are saying what we have to do is let them basically

intrude into people's personal lives. They will have to become

more inventive and more creative or be more entertaining. I manage to

entertain people without searching through rubbish bins, I don't have

to do that. They have to stop the hacking and blagging, people won't

put up with it more, and the public understand how they get the stories,

but the Mail fluffy kitten stories won't go away, that is the price

public figures have to put up with if we want a free press to expose

it. If we want the MPs expenses story. The Mail is a newspaper, we

choose as the newspaper to be Alan Partridge's favourite paper,

because it has contempt for the weak, and zenophobic attitude, and

a little England that people drink warm beer and all the corner shops

are run by white people. That is not reality, I don't think someone

who presents and trades on people's worst fears, as that newspaper does,

it panneders to people's worst fears, I don't believe it deserves

to exist. If it went to the wall I would be delighted there are lots

of better newspapers. It is worse than the tabloids. I have great

sympathy with you on the Mail, if not the Daily Mail who? We need

somebody out there to sell the papers. The Mail has a certain

duplicity to its nature. amusingly said it was half way

between a broadsheet and tabloid. will be interested to see what they

write about you. If they do I will be pleased. The MP for north

Somerset is still our Defence Secretary tonight. Liam Fox has had

to cancel a few engagements so he doesn't spend his time answering a

question about a man who he says is above reproach of any kind. A trip

to Paris today was punctuated by sniping from reporters,

demonstrating how few people share his belief that there is nothing to

discuss. The questions swirling around

Defence Secretary, Liam Fox, and his close friend, Adam Werritty,

are around the issue of money. We now know Mr Werritty met Dr Fox on

visits abroad on 18 occasions in the past 17 months. Was there any

financial gain? How did he pay for his travel expenses? Was he

advising clients keen to get access to the minister. REPORTER: In what

capacity did he travel with you, unofficial advisor, friend?

Dr Fox was in Paris today, keen to deflect the questions. Perhaps the

biggest mystery is who funded Adam Werritty and why? The attention is

turning to rich donors funding a charity called Atlantic Bridge,

which champion the political philosophy of Margaret Thatcher and

Ronald Reagan. It was linked to Liam Fox and run by Adam Werritty.

This hedge fund manager has reportedly donated thousands of

pounds. Was this money, and perhaps other donations effectively paying

Mr Werritty. Antic Bridge was removed as a registered charity -

Atlantic Bridge was removed as a registered charity a few months ago,

because it was said to be promoting a political party close to the

Conservatives. Government has to have rules. The taxpayer funds the

operation of Government. To have a parallel operation, off the books,

privately funded, undid he claird, no transparency - undeclared, and

no transparency is worrying. What was Mr Fox's with Sri Lanka, and

what were Mr Werritty's aims? Fox had a long standing

relationship with Sri Lanka, and his ideas were known as the Fox

plan. Last year Adam Werritty and Dr Fox met with the Sri Lankan

President in a London hotel. No British officials were present.

had a meeting with the President of the Sri Lanka at the same time. I'm

well aware of the nature of the meetings. It is in a swith, it is

set out - suite, it is set out as if it was in the Sri Lankan

Presidential Palace. A substantial number of officials from Sri Lanka.

The President of Sri Lanka was not having private meetings. These were

very public meetings, I suspect they are recorded on camera. It is

Mr Werritty's business interests that could determine the fate of

Liam Fox. We know, for example, he has good relations with the

Government of Sri Lanka. If it turns out the Sri Lankans are his

client and have paid him for lobbying work that could be very

serious indeed. If there is money involved will

that change things? It is a hypothetical question. In all these

things you have to look at the context in which something may or

may not happen. To take a particular emphasis on a particular

point in a particular way, I think, is a question I'm not able to

answer at the moment. Has Liam Fox breached the

Ministerial Code? REPORTER: Are you the victim of a witch-hunt?

He returned from Paris and will face questions about the spirit and

limit of the code. In the section on advisors, it says the

Governments will publish every year the names of special advisors and

their pay bill. But when is an advisor a formal advisor and when

is he just a friend. He muddied his private and public interests in way

that was unacceptable. I suspect the biggest charge against him in

the end is just massive misjudgment in the way that he has handled his

affairs. I think there are errors and misjudgments have been made.

But they are not that serious that Liam should have to resign. I

actually think has done, not just a good job in the Ministry of Defence,

but he has gone over and above the call of duty here. When he came in

the budget of that department was a mess, but the huge number of vests

interest were there. He has made sense of the Ministry of Defence,

he's a tough guy and the right guy to be doing it. Critics believe he

has breached the spirit of the ministerial guideline, the latest

version of which was endorsed by the Prime Minister only last year.

David Cameron wrote then we must be transparent about what we do, above

improper influence. That, then, is a benchmark for Liam Fox and Adam

Werritty, his mysterious advisor. Could religious bigotry determine

the outcome of the next American presidential elections. Front

runner to knock Barack Obama out of the White House next year is Mitt

Romney, one-time guff nor of Massachusetts. It is not that, or

his - guff nor of Massachusetts. It is not that or his chis selled chin

that is causing problems, it is because he's a Mormon. Part of the

United States thinks being a Mormon is a cult. We will hear from the

Pastor who makes the accusation. First this report. Out of the

mountains they came, searching for Zion, and in the shadow of the

mountains of Utah, the Mormon found it. The church of the Latter Day

Saintss prospered, building a city near the great Salt Lake.

# I've got hope like a river And here, in Salt Lake City, the

church grew rich. But it was always different, other, separate some how,

from the country it inhabited. Now one of its own is bidding for the

presidency. But that otherness may yet drag his cadidacy down.

Mormon is a paradox, both very American, and yet well beyond the

American mainstream. Take the Great Trek, depicted partly here.

Believers 1300 miles, often in scenes of unimaginable hardship

from Illinois to Salt Lake City, in the mid-19th century, to go west,

to settle in the frontier, to flee religious persecution, what could

be a more American story. But to establish a theocracy that

flourished here briefly, and to practice polygamy, abandoned in

short order, that brought suspicion from fellow Americans. For Mitt

Romney that fear and suspicion became part of his downfall when he

ran for the nomination five years ago. He found himself continuously

being asked about his faith. He tried to tackle the questions head

on. There is one fundamental question about which I'm often

asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus

Christ is the Son of God, and the saviour of mankind. Two months

later he dropped out of the race. Now, four years on, he is the

Republican candidate that Democrats most fear. A politician of the

centre right who can reach out to disaffected independents and swing

voters. I believe in America, and I'm running for President of the

United States. But, again, it has become personal. Last weekend

Baptist Pastor, Robert Jeffress, advised a gathering of social

conservatives, not to vote for Romney, because in his words, he's

not Christian. I would call on governor Perry to repudiate the

sentiments and remarks made by that Pastor. Family friend, Jowers,

believes the issue has waned in the public consciousness, and second

time round Romney is a more rounded figure than the Mormon candidate of

2008. As long as people recognise him as the turn around guy for the

Olympics, as guff nor and his businesses, and so many other

aspects of him. Mormonism is every bit a part of him. I don't think he

will ever shy away from that. is a book out now that describes

Romney as springing from an historically racist religion, that

kind of stuff will keep coming. Yeah, certainly there is, Mormonism

is a place where some people will find political advantage, and they

will mit it. Would it be easier if he wasn't a Mormon? At this point

probably, yes. On the other hand, who knows where he would be without

his Mormon faith. On a warm Saturday evening in Utah,

two local universities go head-to- head. The game is a 65,000-seat

sell-out. The faithful are out in force. The sacred name of Jesus

Christ, amen. Brigham Young University, in blue,

are playing at home, they remain outsiders. The university was

established by and for Mormons. Is there a change in America in its

attitude towards Mormons, towards the Mormon religion? I think the

Mormon religion is getting more well known, people know more about

the church. As far as being mainstream, I think people still

consider us different, and not Christian. But I think they

appreciate our values and appreciate what we do for the

country. If Romney becomes the candidate, even the President, does

that change things forever, for Mormonism? You know I don't know if

it is going to change things forever, people will still have

their perceptions, they may think Romney is weird, if they think we

are weird. It will be, in the south, that

Romney's faith could face an early challenge. South Carolina holds the

nation's second primary. This Bible Belt state has proved Romney's

undoing before. One in four Americans say they are less likely

to vote for a Mormon, amongst white evangelicals, that rises to one in

three. A good showing here is critical for

Mitt Romney, as a northern candidate, Romney needs to show

that he can do well, here in the south. But South Carolina is

particularly dangerous territory for Romney. It was here in 2008

that he was uncertificate moanously crushed. It is - uncermoniously

crushed. It is home to the dark arts of political campaigning, and

home to an evangelical Christian comuep community with little time

for Mormons. Professor Mark Tompkins understands voting in the

Bible Belt, and how some Baptists view the Mormon faith. Do they see

it as heresy? Cult is the word that they use more often. It conjures up

the ideas of the cult leaders telling everybody else what to do,

they are making these unusual demands on people in the name of

faith. And the Mormon faith doesn't sound inconsistent with that story

at first blush. The wife of Texas governor, Rick Perry, Romney's only

real rival for the nomination comes to town to open a campaign office.

Mitt Romney's political opponents have enough policy differences with

him to ignore the religious question. But a representative from

up state, where the evangelical community is concentrated,

acknowledges the potential problem. I look at a person's record, and

governor Perry has simply got an outstanding record in the state of

Texas. For people faith is important? Absolutely it is. In

some areas. There are two things that people in South Carolina

learned a long time ago, if you are at a dinner protect, don't discuss

two subjects, religion and politics. # Till me meet

The Mormon journey has been a long one. Once outcast, feared and

derided for their beliefs and customs, they have risen to the top

of American business and politics. Now, one of their number is

reaching for the highest summit of all, his faith may well be his

undoing, but if he succeeds, another taboo will have fallen, and

an era of suspicion and ignorance will have come to a close. A short

while ago I spoke to Pastor Robert Jeffress from Dallas. I asked him

what his problem was with Mormonism? Mormonism has never been

considered a part of mainstream Christianity, it is not a problem

to Mormons, the only problem is he's trying to confuse it with

Christianity. Mormonism came 1800 years after Jesus Christ and the

church was established. It has its own human founder, Joseph Smith, it

has its own set of doctrines and book of revelation, The Book of

Mormon. When I tacked about Mormonism being a cult, I was

talking about a theological cult. Those attributes I mentioned

qualify it as a theological cult. I think Mormons are good people and

moral people, but Mormonism is not Christianity. What do you fear if a

Mormon got the presidency? I don't fear anything if a Mormon got the

presidency. The fact is, I have said that if the Republican

candidate end up being Mitt Romney, I probably would vote for him over

Barack Obama. But when I talked to the values voters summit in

Washington, and I introduced Governor Rick Perry, I was speaking

to evangelical Christians, Jeremy, and I said given the choice between

a competent Christian, and a competent non-Christian, Christians

often to prefer a competent Christian. And Mitt Romney is not a

Christian, although he says he believes in Jesus Christ? Well, I

mean lots of people believe in Jesus Christ, it is what you

believe about Jesus Christ that determines whether or not you are

going to heaven or hell when you die. The Bible says whoever calls

upon the name of the Lord will be saved. Jeremy, I don't think

anybody goes to heaven or hell in a group. We all go individual lie,

based on what have decided to do with Jesus Christ as our saviour. I

was saying if Romney is a Mormon and embraces the Mormon faith, that

is not Christianity. What is interesting is Mormons have said

all along that they were not a part of historic Christianity. They say

that the Christian church was corrupt from the time of the

apostles, until 1829 when Joseph Smith came, they have never

embraced historical Christianity by their own admission. What will

happen to Mr Romney when he dies? have no idea. If he has trusted in

Jesus Christ, the Jesus Christ of the Bible to save him from his sins,

he will be in heaven. If he has trusted some other God or no God,

he will spend ecertainty separated from God, like all of us will. The

Bible says all of us are sinners, not just Mormons, Catholics,

Baptists, we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God,

we all need Jesus Christ to be our saviour. Can you ever imagine

America tolerating an atheist President? Absolutely I can. I

think that's very possible. A Jew? Absolutely. A Muslim? I think that

could. A Muslim? Yes. All of these things are possible? Absolutely.

Because the article 6 of our constitution says there shall be no

religious test to hold public office. But I'm quick to remind

viewers across the pond here, that refers to Government cannot impose

a religious litmus test. It has nothing to say about private

citizens deciding to choose a candidate based on their religion.

We have every right to do so. In fact, the first Chief Justice of

our Supreme Court, John Jay, also the author of the Federalist Papers,

said, "we have the duty and the privilege in this Christian nation

to select and prefer Christians as our leaders". So the first Chief

Justice of the United States believed that it was not bigotted

to say it is right to prefer Christians over non-Christians.

Mr Jeffress thank you for joining us, thank you.

It's good to be with you, Jeremy. Well that's quite enough for one

day. I will give the editor of the day his nightly glass of milk, he's

confused, not as confused as Phoenix Jones, he used pepper spray

to try to break up what he thought was a street fight, but the police

say it was dancing. Look huge fight. We still have a residue of cold air

in Scotland and north-east England, chilly here first thing in the

morning, milder elsewhere underneath the cloud. For most of

us a cold start. The cloud lifting and thinning any rain petering out.

Some will see sunshine, predicting where, that is the trick. It looks

cloudy across northern England but dryer in the afternoon. Not as

chilly as today. Brightening up throughout the afternoon, across

East Anglia, not through the Midland or the south-east of

England, but through the West Country that could be a favoured

spot to see sunshine in the afternoon. For most of the day

Devon and Cornwall could be cloudy, drizzle up for a while over the

moors. For Wales the north coast and the marshes could see sunshine

during the afternoon. It should be dry as well, it has been a much

better day in Northern Ireland. Again it should be dry tomorrow,

sunshine near the north coast. Sunny spells around the Moray Frith,

and Aberdeenshire, it might brighten up in the central belt.

Not as cold as it has been. Temperatures rising over the next

few days to 17 degrees in Edinburgh. Further south, we will see a lot of

cloud on Thursday, not much sunshine, better chance of seeing

sunshine I think on Friday, as the cloud begins to break up as we