01/12/2011 Newsnight


In-depth news analysis. Paul Mason asks how at risk the British economy is from the eurozone debt crisis, and what can be done to solve it? Presented by Kirsty Wark.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 01/12/2011. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Will the map of Europe be redrawn by Christmas? According to George


Osborne, the future of the British economy relies on the plan now


being hatched in Paris and Berlin. A new treaty for a new Europe. But


is anyone buying it? TRANSLATION: So, I say to you,


Europe has to be rethought, rebuilt, there is an emergency. The world


will not wait for Europe. Wel we will be discussing how the


eurodrama will unfold, and whether this is the last chance before we


go under the edge. Now we know big deficits will be


with us long after the next election, how will our parties and


political actors react. Tonight, we reveal how British


technology, which can monitor your phone, e-mails and tweets, has been


supplied to middle eastern regimes. The Syrian regime has access


supplied by western companies, that enables them to follow those users


and locate them and therefore arrest them.


And Martin Scorsese on film, art and the politics that permeate his


pictures. For me, Casino, for example, was a political film. The


amount of excess, there is nothing that is never enough, until finally


it explodes. Good evening. Maybe the eurozone


will break up, said the governor of the Bank of England today. Maybe it


will continue, but countries will default. The truth is, no-one knows.


It was a particularly worrying sentiment from the governor, given


the Chancellor, earlier this week, said Britain's economic future now


depends on what happens across the water. Tonight in Paris, President


Sarkozy began to set out yet another rescue plan. One that would


involve a new treaty to overhaul and re-think Europe. But has it any


chance of working? Paul Mason reports.


There are, technically, just nine days left to bring financial order


to Europe. By the time the EU's leaders meet, a week tomorrow, they


need to have some kind of little piece of paper to wave, some plan,


some undertaking. But E-day is looming, and no such undertaking


his been given. We did get this, though. A speech


from the man who could sort it out. The credible signal is needed to


give ultimate assurance over the short-term. What I believe our


economic and monetary union needs is a new fiscal compact. A


fundamental restatement of the fiscal rules, together with a


mutual fiscal commitments. That means putting Brussels, Berlin and


maybe Paris in charge of everybody else's budget, leaving eurozone


voters to decide what colour ties the politicians doing their bidding


will wear. Here's the problem, peripheral Europe is effectively


bust, the money the rest of Europe raised to bail them out is not


enough. And, the ECB could sort it by printing money and lending it,


but it won't, that is the problem. And so tonight, a cunning new plan


from President Sarkozy. Well not a plan, but the promise of plan on


Monday. It will involve treaty changes. TRANSLATION: France and


Germany, after so many tragedies, decide to unite their destiny, to


look towards the future together. My dear compatriots, to backtrack


on this strategy would be absolutely unforgivable. Germany


and France separated would result in the whole of Europe being


separated and weakened. Under the emerging plan, eurocountries will


hand powers to Brussels to oversee national budgets, to intervene and


cancel them where needed to stay within the rules. Then, and only


then, will the Germans allow the ECB to start buying the debts of


the distressed south. Ultimately, that would lead to pooling Europe's


debts in called eurobonds, a sticking point with the Germans up


to now. In Nicolas Sarkozy's speech tonight, we have a feeling that


perhaps if France is willing to go towards a new treaty, which is the


word Nicolas Sarkozy used in his speech, perhaps it means that


Germany is going towards the creation of eurobonds. Which today


looks a something that is inevitable, at least from France.


There is a credit crunch happening in Europe's banks, that creates two


dangers for Britain. One, economic slowdown, because that is our


export market, two, contagion, to our banks. The Bank of England


revealed today that RBS is heavily exposed to bank debts in the


troubled south of Europe to the tune of 30% of its core capital.


Add in the exposures to the debts of troubled countries, and 83% of


the core capital of Britain's big four banks is at risk. Of course,


that's only a problem if there is a credit crunch. You can see signs of


a credit crunch already in the euro area, I don't think that is begun


yet, but you can see how it would come through here, if funding costs


were to continue to be as high as they are. Now they are working on


contingency plans for a eurobreak up, what kind of event are they


planning for? Maybe it won't break up, maybe it will in various forms.


Maybe there will be questions of default. None of us know. It is no


sense to say there is a single one event in which we have to make


contingencies. While those in power contemplate Armageddon, people in


the high streets, here and across Europe, have to sense the gloomy


atmosphere and hope for the best. The best might have to be a large


amount of money. It is still possible they will come up with the


called bazooka mark II, about 300 billion euros from the IMF, 250


billion from the EU stability fund, and maybe 160 billion from the


European Central Bank itself. Analysts believe it is this, money


cobbled together from wherever you can, that has the best chance of


ending the crisis. But all ending the crisis means, this time, is


putting it off for a year, or maybe two.


Tomorrow David Cameron heads for Paris, he has pledged to do what he


can. The problem is, that's not much, except stick to the old


addage, keep calm, and carry on cutting. Paul Mason, to peer


through the economic gloom is Ken Rogoff, who wrote the book on debt,


quoted by George Osborne, to justify his economic strategy, Lord


Lamont, once Chancellor himself, of course, and by Gillian Tett of the


Financial Times, who is in New York. First of all, Ken Rogoff, a hedge


fund manager said, was he worried? He wasn't just worried as a hedge


fund manager, he was worried as a father what was happening. We don't


have to worry about his own personal finance, how long do you


think Merkel and Sarkozy have got to sort this out? Let's put it this


way, they can make things blow up really quickly, but I don't think


they can fix things really fast. The discussion here is very, very


simple, the Germans don't want to put water into a leaky bucket. It


is not just a matter of having a big bazooka, it is not just a


matter of having enough this time, they need a system so it doesn't


just keep going. Germany is being asked, essentially, to take on a


lot of debt, and open-ended guarantee, in return for handshake


from the periphery of Europe. It is a very, very delicate deal. Gillian


Tett, the Germans don't want to put water into leaky bucket, if it


could be fibgsd that would be better, this is this super-- fixed


that would be better, this is where you have this superdeal with


fingers in every pie in Europe. There is a game of brinkmanship,


and Angela Merkel is taking it to the brink. The key thing to


understand is what the central banks did on Wednesday in terms of


their joint arrangements, is really provide a breathing space for the


next eight or nine days, for the eurozone leaders to get their act


together. The brilliant irony is the Central Bankers around the


world are in some ways quite a co- ordinated bunch, they understand


each other and operate together smoothly. The problem is, it is


still not clear if you have a deal on the table. There is real concern


in the US, where I'm sitting, if they don't get their act together


in seven days, they will have missed their last, best chance.


What does it look like from your position, Lord Lamont, first of all,


before we talk about David Cameron's reaction to all of this,


does it looks a if a deal could be on the table? From what has been


outlined in the programme, it sounds as if it is going to be more


supervision of national budgets, peer group pressure, with a little


bit more teeth, a bit more discipline. To be honest, I don't


think that would really work, I'm rather surprised that the


suggestion is, that if they can get more control of other country's


budgets, the ECB would then be asked to buy the bonds of these


peripheral countries. I personallyam -- personally am


rather surprised Germany would accept this. Let's talk about the


British response, the idea there would be a new treaty, do you think


that David Cameron's position would be that in order to get this new


treaty through, he would be prepared to wave it through or --


wave it through, or looking for differences in Working Time


Directives or is it the wrong time to make those arguments? If the


provisions don't affect Britain, it would be reasonable to say we would


allow them to go through. It would be ridiculous to call a referendum


in Britain over something that didn't affect us. He has to


absolutely ensure any new treaty changes can't, in some indirect way,


be used against British interests, be used as protection. Be used to


discriminate against the British financial services industry. He has


to be absolutely sure about that. Obviously the financial


transactions tax has to be something that, if it ever comes


into existence, does not have any effect on Britain. Ken Rogoff, are


you as pessimistic as Lord Lamont, as to whether this supervisory


structure would actually work, nation-to-nation? I agree entirely


with Lord Lamont, that it is not going to work, at least not for


years and years. The Maastricht Treaty didn't really work, that was


a treaty. The Maastricht Treaty the French and the Germans just


violated it, they won't over the 60% rule, Tewin suited them. What


they realise -- when it suited them, they realised there wasn't a lot


they could do about it. There is basically a handshake, this isn't a


treaty, even if it was a treaty, what are the ramifications. You


really need more of a political union. It is not enough just to


talk about superadvising national budgets. You have to have a


Treasury that has huge taxation power, you have to transfer a lot


of power to the centre, or at least lay out a road map where that will


happen. Do you agree with that? There has to be something, a much


bigger idea than what has been put forward just now, Gillian Tett?


think the problem right now, we have been up and down this hill so


many times in the eurozone in the last six months, the trust has


really shattered. People, as Ken says, doesn't trust a handshake,


but want tangible action. What people are looking for, in terplgs


of creating a union that work -- terms of creating a union that


works, is some element of fiscal union and transfers, be it joint


eurobonds or something like that t will be a question of whether they


can come up with something tangible that will matter in the next eight


days. A giant Treasury, a big fiscal union? When Mrs Merkel uses


the phrase "fiscal union", she means something completely


different, she doesn't mean a European Treasury, or European


minister of finance, she just means more supervision of other country's


budgets, with Germany in a leading position. But, frankly, that is


more or less what we have had, and when you have the criminals as the


jury, you don't get very far. Inevitably, will the shape of


Europe change, there will be defaults, will countries drop out


of the eurozone in order to keep the northern centre holding?


think we have moved into more dangerous territory, because you


are now, for the first time, getting people openly talking about


the shape of the eurozone altering, about individual countries dropping


out, about the possibility of the whole thing imploding. This is


quite unusual for people openly to be discussing this. We had that at


the Cannes summit, when the for the first time, having denied Greece


could ever leave the euro, people suddenly said, yes, if Greece


doesn't want to abide by the rules, it may have to be chucked out.


Previously they said that was unthinkable. Ken Rogoff, in your


view, will there be 19 countries in the eurozone after the new year, or


will we see a much smaller eurozone s that inevitable? I think it will


have to get smaller before it gets bigger. I don't see how they can


have a real fiscal union, more political union, without looking


hard at the current membership, and realising some of the countries,


Greece is the obvious one, but I think there are others, Portugal,


they are really ready to be in that. What worries me about what they are


doing, they seem to be making this handshake as if they don't have to


make those decisions. Then it is hopeless, Italy is at least an


interesting case. You might be able to keep Italy in, Greece has


reached absurdity. Gillian Tett, as you said, we have been marched up


and down the hill. We heard Mervyn King, hearing about the nine days


ahead. Will this just be kicked forward again, or does this


actually have to be the real crunch? The onus is we -- the


answer is we just don't know. One of my reporters went ahead to a


conference in New York, of emerging market investors from around the


world. The question was asked of the audience, how many of you think


the eurozone will be together, in its current form, with all 17


members in a year's time, 80% of the audience said they didn't think


it would hang together. That is the indication of the scepticism and


cynicism in the markets. If you, from what Lord Lamont said about


what Angela Merkel thinks fiscal union is, they think everyone needs


to be German right now, and the rest of the world is saying it


won't happen. We are in the middle of a decade of economic pain,


living standards are dropping, the gulf between the rich and poor yawn,


and the structural deficit, George Osborne admits, will be with us


through the next election. The bombshell, how will the political


debate change, and are our politicians up to the challenge? As


the dust settled on the Autumn Statement, what became clear is


that the Conservative attempt to demonstrate the support for women,


is hardly going smoothly. It is women, overwhelmingly, who will be


hit by the Chancellor's decision to snatch back �110 a year, promised


to many of Britain's poorest families. How could the Liberal


Democrats show themselves as distinct from the Tories, amidst


the prognosis of economic doom beyond the next election. Danny


Alexander said it himself on Tuesday's Newsnight. You are going


into the next election, promising further billions of pounds in cuts


and public spending. That is what you are going to say in your


manifesto in the next election. afraid so. Senior Liberal Democrats


Newsnight spoke to today, have intimated their fears for the


party's distinctiveness. One senior Does the public believe that Labour


has a different and credible economic script? When the task of


the next Government will be to curb a still large deficit. The polls


suggest that people think things would be even worse under Labour.


How are the politicians going to deal with this future for political


insiders, I'm joined by Danny Finkelstein of the Times, and once


of Conservative Central Office, Tony McNulty, and Edward hare sis


former ld MP. The idea we are all in this glrb Liberal Democrat MP.


The idea we are all in this together, with the Conservatives


thinking about women and the idea of that, with the fewer public


sector workers, the idea that violent and mental issues won't be


at the fore any more. It is back to the barricades. There will be


massive distributional issues making cuts of that kind. Making


cuts in public spending will come from people who depend on spending


more or who work in the public sector, that is very hard. For


people who are Conservative modernisers it is very difficult.


Isn't the problem with this, David Cameron set himself out to be the


moderniser, that was the USP, and here you have it, the retrenchment


again, the language doesn't sell that in any kind of positive way,


does it? It is very, very difficult. The problem for all political


parties, is the next election will be one in which you are not looking


at how do you spend the money in the future, you are looking at how


to make more cuts, how do you make a little bit less and a bit more.


You have Steve Hilton not believing in climate change any more? I don't


know about that. This leaves a problem for the Liberal Democrats,


Evan Harris, you are tied in a sense to the Conservatives' coat


tails, Danny Alexander himself said, you go into the next election with


the deficit not obliterated, having to promote the same level of cuts.


The problem that exists for Conservative modernisers is even


greater for Liberal Democrats, that is why I think, it is quite clear


when you make cuts, as most Liberal Democrats accept has to be done, as


Danny said, it will affect people who use public services the most.


That is why I think Liberal Democrats will now concentrate on


stopping story tax cuts for better- off people, the 50p rate must stay.


There must be no question of there being inheritance tax cuts, things


like that will be well defined. has to be something more creative,


otherwise you seem joined at the hip? There will be differenciation,


more on those issues, they become even more important. How do the


Liberal Democrats do that? I think actually there is a position for


the Liberal Democrats, it is on distributional issues. I think the


Tories will obviously try to close it down, they won't go after the


50p or the in herance tax, that gives them a problem -- inheritance


tax, and that gives them a problem with their base. The Liberal


Democrats believe in redistribution and they can argue about the


fairness of the measures and moderate them. If we are


Conservative fiscal, it is in the coalition, it is not in the next


manifest at the moment that is why I think Danny Alexander did get it


wrong. If you say your people are in the public sector, will you get


the vote next time round with this platform? Danny Alexander nor Nick


Clegg writes the manifesto, you can call them the architect, he was


chairman of the body that wrote it, he didn't win many of those battles.


What I have been told today, and you said this in the introduction,


rightly, when he said the Liberal Democrats would go into the


election with, not just more cuts set out, which may be the case, but


a specific agreed cuts with another party. That is not going to happen,


because we are committed to being independent of the other parties.


Let's talk about that with Tony McNulty, you are independent of


both parties. Can we see a position, or would it just be so beyond the


pale, that Labour could do a deal with the Liberal Democrats? I think


this week has been seismic in terms of politics for some of the reasons


suggested. The notion that the next election, whatever the outcome, if


it is not a majority Labour Government, that we do deals with


Huhne and others that is gone. That is a question for the Liberal


Democrats. They are getting rid of four of their beasts? Let's see if


they get four seats. What about the Labour Party? We have to put


ourselves in the polls. The redistribution we have seen that


the liberals are endorsed have been from the poorest to the richest.


The new cuts announced have been much more severe on the bottom


percentage than higher. Labour has some flexibility. I don't think the


Liberal Democrats have, you can't issue a red book with an as tricks


that said only subject to the agreement of the Liberal Democrats,


The Labour Party has a degree of flexibility, you still have to


commit to vast cuts and explain, roughly speaking, where they come


from. There may be some flexibility for slowing down the cuts, at that


point, you won't be able to cancel them all. You will have to fight


that on the election. How will Labour get its credibility back,


will Ed Balls say slash, cut, slash, cut? They have to say it now, not


six months down the road towards the next election. The policy of


Labour has not to come forward with the big decisions because they see


it as foolish? They don't have to go into the detail, Cameron learned


that from the last election. They must get to stage where Labour's


economic narrative become as real one. Part of that is challenging


the analysis so far. David Miliband started that last night with a good


speech. With the Labour Party needs to recover, it is almost as


tempting as being tribunal and saying we don't do a -- tribal and


saying we don't do a deal. Let him speak? You have this problem, there


are plenty of people in the Labour Party who think if the economy


tanks or doesn't improve or flatlines Labour won't need to


regain credibility. That is tempting, just as it is tempting to


personalise politics and say whatever the merits after the next


election of getting power, we are not going to deal with individuals,


I don't think your leader take that is same view.


What I think we are missing a big point, that is all the parties are


going to face something that nobody has faced in this country ever,


that is we simply not going to be able to afford the state, in the


way that we have been able to afford it in the past. We are all


going to have to propose new ways of doing things, on a very grand


scale. What we have learned is the economy is far less wealthy. So


this changes not just this kind of politics, the politics we have


talked about, but much more fundamental things. I think there


is room for the superrich to pay more, that might well be a dividing


line. I'm not convinced that those in the Liberal Democrats will take


that view and win out. That will be a battle. We will want to


differentiate ourselves, even more than we have in the past. And I


don't accept this idea that the red book writes the manifesto, that is


absolutely wrong. I don't think Nick Clegg agreed with what Danny


Alexander said on this programme. We can explore this, even further


in weeks to come and months to come. If everybody is going to be


batoning down the hatchs in the economy and there is no room for


manoeuvre. In what way does politics play out, what do people


want from politicians they are not getting now? First of all, everyone


knows the situation is very, very grim. They don't expect politicians


to solve the problems immediately, but they do expect some hope at the


end of the day. The problem will be, not what politicians say, but


simply the actual reduction in people's real living standards, for


people who don't earn very much. That will be very difficult for the


Government. The problem for Labour is, it weakens them because they


will fight an election where their narrative is let's borrow some more


in order to borrow less. Such an unconvincing line that nobody will


believe. The line is to let's borrow more as a result of failure,


that can't be right either. Syria is now in state of civil war, a UN


official said today, it is estimated more than 4,000 people


have been killed by pro-Government forces since March, who is


supplying President Assad and other repressive regimes with the


technology to hunt down the dissenters. An investigation by


Newsnight and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, has found


a British company, based in Oxfordshire, has been implicated in


the sale of state-of-the-art technology to Syria. It is not the


only British company with a role in allowing despotic regimes to access


technologies to help them spy on their sit ens.


-- citizens. The Arab Spring, Egypt, Libya, now Syria. Popular uprisings,


fuelled by new technology. Co- ordinated using mobile phones, the


Internet, texts and tweets. These pictures captured last week


from Syria, spread around the globe, on the World Wide Web. But now, the


very technologies that helped spark these revolutions are being used to


crush them. Technology of this kind can be every bit as lethal as the


bullets directly sold by a munitions company, or armments


quartermastre. Brighton beach, on the Sussex coast,


an unlikely venue to host a hub of dissent. But the current Syrian


popular uprising is organised on an international scale. Here in


Brighton, mam mam plays his party. The Arab Spring has turned into


winter in Syria, we have 20,000 people in prison, 4,500 people are


dead and people are struggling on daily basis. He has no permanent


address. He flits from place-to- place, using friends' address,


using their internet connections, laptops and computers, fearful he's


being monitored by the Syrian Security Services, here on British


soil. He maintains daily contact with


friends and colleagues, in Syria. Helping to desem raitate


information about developments in - - deseminate information about


developments in his country. And such has been their success, that


even the cyberactivists, operating behind closed doors, those


uploading images of the demonstrations, are now being


targeted too. The people who are usually using


the Internet to communicate with us are at more risk being arrested by


the regime than people on the streets. This is because we believe


that the Syrian regime, and we have evidence for that, that the Syrian


regime has access to software supplied by western countries, that


enables them to follow those users, and locate them. How many people do


you personally know of who have been actively targeted by the


state? Since May, and early July, I know of about 40-50 people, I went


to school with when I was back in Syria, they have been arrested and


we believe they have been arrested as a result of the new technology


and software that the Syrian regime is using to target activists.


Newsnight has learned that Syria has been provided with technology,


produced by the British-owned company, Sophos. This is its sales


pitch. Access to retain telecomdata, has become an important tool for


law enforcement and Intelligence Services in their fight against


Toryism. We asked Sophos for -- Terrorism. We asked Sophos for an


interview. They confirmed that it supplied technology to an Italian


company last year, they knew it was part of a bigger contract with


Syria. We don't monitor data, that is done within the


telecommunications software. The software is designed so when data


is requested by police forces can be safely be passed to the police


force. But you are selling it to nation states?, you are providing


it to nation states where the police force don't have a


particularly good track record, if we look at Syria there are problems


for many years? As a company we ensure, whoever we sell to, we


ensure we follow EU regulations and guidelines. Our customers are


telecommunications companies. say you follow the letter of the


law, isn't there a moral responsibility? Yeah, when we see


situations like Syria, absolutely, we are concerned, and we will take


further steps, the moral responsibility. We don't have the


benefit of hindsight to look back and remove our software where it


has been sold. Steve Mumford admits Sophos doesn't know if its product


has been sold to other authoritarian regimes. We showed


him the interview with Mahmood. have evidence that the Syrian


regime has access to software supplied by western companies, that


enables them to follow those users and locate them. Will you think


hard about who you supply in the future? First of all, I think, from


what I hear on this report, none of our software would be involved in


that. You would not need our software to do the tracking down


and the finding of people. Secondly, absolutely, when we see activities


like this, we absolutely will stop doing business with anyone


contributing to this. He agreed there was a need for tighter


regulation of the industry. industry which now sells equipment


to dictators and democracies alike. Today WikiLeaks, in conjunction


with Privacy International, launched a database detailing the


scale of the electronics surveillance industry. It is worth


surveillance industry. It is worth more than 3 billion a year, with


more than 160 companies in 25 countries. Most pariah states don't


have the technology base to develop good surveillance software. The


Chinese can, I would be very surprised if countries like Syria


could. If you are the secret police in Syria, you are naturally going


to buy your surveillance software from Britain or France, or America


or Italy or wherever you can get it. It is not that hard to find. This


is the Milipol International Trade Fair held in Paris a few weeks ago.


We went along. Amid the sniper rifles, machine guns, weapons and


military hardware up for sale. An entire section was devoted to


surveillance. I spoke with one salesman, I asked him if he was at


all concerned about how his company's technology might be used


by certain regimes. This is a direct quote. "We have no control


over what they will do, targeting, we can't have any control on that,


the person who may be bad for you, may not be bad for me. So we can't


judge that. We're just providing the technology for finding people


who are of concern to a particular nation." We reject the view that


Government's oppression of the internet, phone networks and social


media at times of unrest is acceptable. Britain will always be


on the side of people aspiring for political and economic freedom. In


the Middle East and around the world. Laudible sentiments from


Foreign Secretary, William Hague, but actions speak louder than words.


Newsnight, and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, have been


looking at the role of UK-based companies, exporting state-of-the-


art technology, which can be put to use by questionable regimes.


ThorpeGlen, Suffolk, said to have sold tracking and monitoring


technology to Indonesia. Gamma Group, Andover Hampshire, via a


third party, offered monitoring technology to President Mubarak's


regime in Egypt. Hidden Technology Systems Limited, Essex, sold


tracking devices to Saudi Arabia, who, it says, wanted to buy the


best of British. And, Creativity Software, Kingston upon Thames,


Surrey, sold tracking technology to a mobile phone tracking network in


Iran. It is this involvement with Iran that has prompted concern from


leading politicians. The crossbench peer Lord Alton has asked dozens of


questions in the House of Lords. He cites the case of an Iranian


journalist tortured in jail. He was subjected not only to physical


abuse, but they detailed all of the conversation that is he had, and


they were able to say whom he had met as a result of using technology


which had been sold to the Iranian regime. My concern is, that it is


not just Iran, but throughout the whole of the region, that we have


been aiding and abetting, the very despots that democracy activists


and human rights campaigners have been trying to replace through the


Arab Spring. The details of Creativity Software's deal with


Iran are not known. Through Lord Alton's persistent questioning, it


has emerged it had a stamp of approval through GCHQ. I find it


really extraordinary that in many to a question I tabled, that the


Government have conceded that an agency, operating out of GCHQ, held


a meeting with Creativity Software, and they discussed the dual


application of this technology, and then nothing at all was done to


deter the export of technology, that could be used to abuse humam


rights activists, to arrest democracy activists and to lead to


people being tortured in Iranian prisons. We contacted all of the


companies named in our investigation. Creativity Software,


confirmed its commercial engagments started in 200 9, it says it wasn't


deployed until 2011. It says any connection with alleged human


rights abuses is clearly erroneous. Hidden Technology, confirmed is


supplied tracking technology to Saudi Arabia. ThorpeGlen, we made


repeated requests for comments, it is yet to reply. Gamma Group, it


said in statement that it did not supply a specific tracking


technology to Egypt. Sophos say the deal with Syria has


now been terminated. It and its Italian business partner said the


system was installed but not operational. As the protests in


Syria continue, cyberactivists are looking at new ways to avoid


detection, fully aware that a growing number of western companies


are successfully selling monitoring and tracking technology to whoever


is prepared to pay. No Government minister was


available to speak to us about the sale of British technology abroad.


Machismo, religion, redemption, Martin Scorsese's films from Taxi


Driver, Mean Streets and Raging Bull, have shed light on all the


darkest places, now he has come out with Hugo, a family film, and a


celebration of moving pictures in 3D, no less, this week Scorcese was


in London and met Peter Marshall to talk about movies, music, in what


he considers to be his major political work, you may be


surprised by his answer. The master on set and in his


element. Martin Scorsese's first family film, Hugo, honours the


history of cinema itself. With a British cast, homage is paid to the


pioneers that brought, what the director calls, the magic, into his


life. The first thing that came to mind, or the feeling, was being


always, more or less, streeted as an invalid as a child, because of


the asthma I had for so many years. You had asthma? Yes, from the age


of three on. Being kept away from sports, nature, anything green, and


certainly animals, and no running, no hysterical laughter, and so I


was in the movie theatres a lot. Whatever I couldn't do or be a part


of, in the life around me, some how in the imagination, and in the


spirit of the cinema, I experienced it. I shared it with my father,


mainly, in the early days. The message from Hugo, in ultra


modern 3D is for getting the past only kills the present. Kingsley is


the great director, now reduced to running a toy shop, his film work


disregarded, as the movies have moved on. History, says Scorcese,


is the key to understanding. are a human encliek peedia! I saw,


I was able to see many of these films at the time, when I was home


alone, waiting for my parents to come back from work, there was a


television set. Jean Cocteau, the basic American films and British


films. The British cinema is a very important to me from 1945 on.


Scorcese's own place in film history is assured. From Taxi


Driver to Raging Bull, and then, into the new century, an Oscar for


The Departed, these days his music documentaries are matching the


success. If I had the ability to compose and play music, that is


where I would have found myself, in a sense, expressing myself. I think


music in its basic form is a pure form. You bring them together and


make them work together in way which seems to enhance both? Film


to me is very musical. A film without music is very musical,


because of the rhythm of the cuts and how you proceed, the pacing of


the picture. The pace of the film and how the audience reacts, I


should say, camera moves, obviously a musical. The rhythm of motion in


a way. So, for me, music is part of your blood, in a way, it has to be


so much part of your life. My brother played guitar, my father


used to be able to. I was never able to. You have fairly Catholic


tastes as well? I think so, yes. We're New Yorkers, and you know,


working-class people, radio playing all the time, whether it was opera,


or swing music, or whether it was American or British swing, some


jazz, of course. Dylan's music in No Direction Home,


was punched up to startling effect. With George Harrison's Living In A


Material World, he has repeated the trick. Scorcese enjoys music with a


wallop, he loved punk. # He's in love with rock'n'roll.


There was a freshness to it, because it had, direct, it had


something to say, they weren't going to be stopped. Somebody told


me family member made meat balls for the clash? My mother. Your mum


and Joe Strummer? I know Joe, and the manager, and a young lady named


Pearl Harbour, yes. And we had some good Italian dinners, we used to


cook every Sunday, my mother would come. She would say I'm sure all


the buys would come, she would hold and hug -- these boys would come,


she would hold them and hug them. Punks for lunch? They were very


sweet. As far back as I would remember, I always wanted to be a


gangster. Scorcese's best known for his gangster films like Goodfellas,


rarely stinting on the body count. But the director said one of his


hardest hitting, Casino, was more than anything, a political story.


The crash we all now endure, he says he put on screen two decades


ago. For me it has to be in the microcosim, in way, for me, Casino,


for example, was a very political film. In the sense that in the


opening image you have Robert De Niro walk out on the screen, in a


salmon-coloured sports coat, white slacks, and patent leather shoes,


gets into this Cadillac, turns the key and the car blows up. It is a


true story. The amount of excess, the amount of never, there is


nothing that is ever enough, until finally it explodes.


This was in 1995. It was a concern of mine that, and that is one of


the reasons of making the George Harrison film, Harrison pointed it


out, he had everything at the age of 19, 21, but there has to be more,


there has to be more to being alive. It was like how much more do we


need of this. Look at this, they are tearing down the old Vegas,


where it was like an old western, where you would have gun fighters


or gamblers coming in, they would gamble, that is what they do, they


gamble. Here, and the new Vegas, by the end of that film, it is a Vegas


where they bring the family, because we have theme parks for


them outside, while you are gambling away the money, for us,


because you are not going to win it, we will keep it. It is purely evil.


Martin Scorsese, tomorrow morning's front pages, beginning with the


Financial Times, Mario Draghi, the petd of the ECB hints at eurozone


Unison have offered Jeremy Clarkson a day to be care worker, it seems


like great idea. Today marks the start of the


Australian summer, celebrated on Bondi beach by some night surfing.


# Night swimming # Your photograph on the dashboard


Hi there. Good evening. It will turn out to be a cold night, clear


and starry skies, widespread frost will develop, especially into the


countryside. A chilly start to Friday morning, patches of ice


around, with overnight showers. As we go through Friday, most places


will have decent sunshine, it will tend to turn cloudy from the west


as we go through the afternoon. Eastern England having decent


sunshine, temperatures up to eight degrees. As we travel further


westwards, here we will notice the freshening south-westerly breeze,


the cloud will thicken up, and eventually outbreaks of rain moving


in. Cloudier in the morning, outbreaks of rain pushing into


western coastal counties, across the hills, damp weather for the


Isle of Man. Cold night, with cloud coming over the top forp for


Northern Ireland, temperatures four or five. Turpblg -- turning to snow


across the Scottish mountains. Through Friday and Saturday, we


lose the outbreaks of rain, it should be dryer generally across


England and Wales through the weekend. The exception is across


southern parts on Saturday. We will see outbreaks of rain, for example,


in London, that should clear fairly quickly. The rain clears away from


the far south of England and Wales. During Saturday morning, most


Paul Mason asks how at risk the British economy is from the eurozone debt crisis, and what can be done to solve it? Following the Autumn Statement, has the political landscape changed forever? Presented by Kirsty Wark.

Download Subtitles