:00:10. > :00:15.Tonight, who knew what and when, in the phone hacking scandal.
:00:15. > :00:21.Could James Murdoch really have been unaware? Why did the Guardian
:00:21. > :00:23.claim the News of the World deleted voice messages when they had no
:00:23. > :00:27.evidence. The author of the Guardian investigation faces a
:00:27. > :00:32.former News of the World executive and the television presenter, Anne
:00:32. > :00:36.Diamond, tell us what it is like to be pursued by the tabloids. Will
:00:36. > :00:40.the coalition split over Europe and the economy stalling, you think
:00:40. > :00:44.these might be good times to be an opposition leader, so how can the
:00:44. > :00:49.Prime Minister get away with shots like this. We all know he has
:00:49. > :00:55.achieved one thing e has completely united his party. Every single one
:00:55. > :01:00.of them has asked Santa for one thing, a new leader for Christmas.
:01:00. > :01:04.Is the tide going out on Ed Milliband? Nearly nine years after
:01:04. > :01:08.the invasion of Iraq, President Obama calls a symbolic end to
:01:08. > :01:17.American combat forces there. How big a power is the United States in
:01:17. > :01:21.the 21st century world? Lord Leveson, the man charged with
:01:21. > :01:26.the public washing of much of the newspaper industry's dirty laundry,
:01:26. > :01:29.asked the police today, to find out once and for all f they can, how
:01:29. > :01:33.voice mails on Milly Dowler's phone came to be wiped. It was the
:01:33. > :01:35.Guardian newspaper's claim, stated as fact, that they had been erased
:01:36. > :01:39.by the News of the World, which triggered the shutdown of what was
:01:39. > :01:43.once the biggest-selling paper in the English speaking world. But the
:01:44. > :01:47.story wasn't true, or the hacking was true, the deleting was just
:01:47. > :01:50.theory. The last editor of the News of the World was up at the Leveson
:01:50. > :01:58.Inquiry to take his punishment today. We report now on where we
:01:58. > :02:04.are. The most far-reaching inquiry into
:02:04. > :02:09.the ethics of the press, led by the most senior judge in the land.
:02:09. > :02:16.Featuring witnesses drawn from the world of celebrity. From the News
:02:16. > :02:19.of the World itself. A newspaper brought down by the work of one
:02:19. > :02:23.Manchester solicitor, who revealed how a murdered schoolgirl's phone
:02:23. > :02:27.had been hacked. When the Guardian newspaper
:02:27. > :02:30.revealed in July that News of the World had hacked Milly Dowler's
:02:30. > :02:33.phone and voice mail messages had been deleted. The wave of public
:02:34. > :02:36.revulsion was such that the paper was forced to close. The Guardian
:02:36. > :02:41.had suggested a News of the World had deleted messages to create room
:02:41. > :02:44.for new ones, which would then form the basis for stories for News of
:02:44. > :02:52.the World. But that allegation is now at the centre of a huge media
:02:52. > :02:55.row. The fact that News of the World
:02:55. > :02:59.hacked Milly Dowler's phone is not in dispute. Newsnight has fresh
:02:59. > :03:02.evidence of this. In April 2002, News of the World was in contact
:03:03. > :03:07.with Surrey Police, leading the investigation into her
:03:07. > :03:10.disappearance. The paper thought a voice mail message left be by a
:03:11. > :03:15.recruitment agency meant she was alive and had run away from home.
:03:15. > :03:25.On the 20th of April, a senior News of the World executive wrote to
:03:25. > :03:34.
:03:34. > :03:38.They had Milly Dowler's PIN code, and were listening to her phone
:03:38. > :03:44.messages during a live police investigation. How tragic that
:03:44. > :03:47.someone, who has not courted the news, but in the news because they
:03:47. > :03:50.happened to be a murdered schoolgirl, the News of the World
:03:50. > :03:54.were hacking a murdered schoolgirl's phone. What about the
:03:54. > :04:01.allegation that the paper had deleted messages. Immediately after
:04:01. > :04:07.her disappearance on the 21st of March, 2002, Milly Dowler's parents
:04:07. > :04:12.phoned her but could leave no message because her messages were
:04:12. > :04:16.fun. But three days later Sally Dowlre got through. I phoned her
:04:16. > :04:26.and it clicked through so I heard her voice. I thought she's picked
:04:26. > :04:30.up her voice mails, she's alive, it was then, really. All of Milly's
:04:30. > :04:33.messages had been deleted, but in a recent statement to the Leveson
:04:33. > :04:37.Inquiry, the Metropolitan Police said it was most likely they were
:04:37. > :04:43.deleted automatically by her phone company. But the Dowlre's lawyer
:04:43. > :04:48.denies this means the Guardian got it fundamentally wrong. We know the
:04:48. > :04:53.News of the World had Milly Dowler's phone number. We know he
:04:53. > :04:57.had the pin number and hacked messages. We know hacking messages
:04:57. > :05:01.can delete messages, we don't know if he deleted the particular
:05:01. > :05:05.messages that gave false hope. Metropolitan Police say they
:05:05. > :05:10.probably didn't? That hasn't been proved. Last night as we were
:05:10. > :05:13.filming Mark Lewis, he received a call from the Mail, asking if the
:05:13. > :05:17.Dowler's should pay back money received from News International.
:05:17. > :05:22.The question was sick, it actually was depraved, it was something I
:05:22. > :05:25.told him he ought to be ashamed of himself. This morning, the Mail's
:05:26. > :05:30.approach was raised at the Leveson's inquiry. Lord Justice
:05:30. > :05:34.Leveson indicated that the facts surrounding the deletions must, if
:05:34. > :05:42.possible, be revealed. I do entirely understand the
:05:42. > :05:52.significance of the issue. I recognise that it is likely to be
:05:52. > :05:56.
:05:56. > :06:00.in the public interest that this be Another important outstanding
:06:00. > :06:04.question is what, if anything, did James Murdoch know about the wider
:06:04. > :06:09.culture of phone hacking at News of the World? He's consistently told
:06:09. > :06:13.parliament that his understanding was it was limited to one rogue
:06:13. > :06:18.reporter, the former royal correspondent, Clive Goodman.
:06:18. > :06:23.News of the World's former legal manager, Tom Crone, said he showed
:06:23. > :06:27.James Murdoch an e-mail in 2008, that confirmed another journalist
:06:27. > :06:32.was involved. I'm pretty sure I held up the front page of the e-
:06:32. > :06:35.mail. I'm also pretty sure he already knew about it. And News
:06:35. > :06:39.International has just admitted that James Murdoch was sent a
:06:39. > :06:44.different e-mail in 2008, saying the situation was as bad as we
:06:44. > :06:48.feared, and someone suing the company was intent on showing that
:06:48. > :06:58.hacking was rife. Mr Murdoch says he responded in minutes without
:06:58. > :06:59.
:06:59. > :07:04.It was a specific criminal act, the hacking of phones, that sparked the
:07:04. > :07:07.Leveson Inquiry, but it has been the lurid tales of unethical
:07:07. > :07:11.journalistic practice had a has been even more shocking. The use of
:07:11. > :07:14.deception and invasion of privacy, is often justified on grounds of
:07:14. > :07:17.public interest, where there is a bigger truth to be told. But some
:07:17. > :07:22.of the evidence to the Leveson Inquiry has stretched the concept
:07:22. > :07:25.of the public interest, way beyond breaking point.
:07:25. > :07:29.Take Newsnight's story about News of the World putting the family of
:07:29. > :07:34.lawyers investigating them for phone hacking under surveillance.
:07:34. > :07:39.News International now admits that was completely unethical.
:07:39. > :07:48.Take investigations into Charlotte Church's father, headlined
:07:48. > :07:52."Church's three in a bed cocaine shot" with her picture beside it.
:07:52. > :07:56.Miss Church said her mother tried to kill herself. My parents who had
:07:56. > :07:59.never been in the industry, apart from looking after me, were being
:07:59. > :08:08.exposed and vilified in this fashion. Take the fact they paid
:08:08. > :08:16.for details of her sex life, as a teenager. Why is it OK that an
:08:16. > :08:23.editor or somebody senior in a newspaper could pay an unemployed
:08:23. > :08:26.boy from Cardiff tens of thousands of pounds to reveal intimate sexual
:08:26. > :08:31.details about another 17-year-old girl. This is not public interest
:08:31. > :08:36.journalism as we know it? There was lots of public interest journalism,
:08:36. > :08:39.every story we did had to abide by the PCC code. I was in features for
:08:39. > :08:44.eight years and never had a PCC investigation over it. We looked
:08:44. > :08:49.deeply at every story we did. Yes, there was salacious, celebrity-
:08:49. > :08:54.driven content, but often with a public interest.
:08:55. > :09:00.There were high points, for sure, cricket match-fixing and cash for
:09:00. > :09:06.honours, but the Leveson Inquiry has produced shocking evidence of
:09:06. > :09:09.deeply unethical practices with little or no public interest at all.
:09:09. > :09:14.Anne Diamond and Lord Hunt chair of the Press Complaints Commission
:09:14. > :09:19.will be talking soon. First we speak to the former head of
:09:19. > :09:24.features at News of the World, and Nick Davies who wrote the original
:09:24. > :09:30.Gardiner article about Milly Dowler's phone -- Guardian article
:09:30. > :09:37.about Milly Dowler's phone. Because Mr Davies doesn't want to appear on
:09:37. > :09:41.the same panel and Mr Casby didn't want to join us, he declined the
:09:41. > :09:46.offer of a one-to-one interview. Let's cut to the chase, the central
:09:46. > :09:49.allegation, the most scandalous of the lot, that a murdered girl's
:09:49. > :09:53.voice mails were deleted by the News of the World, which you
:09:53. > :09:58.claimed to be fact, it wasn't a fact? You are getting it all wrong
:09:58. > :10:02.here. The story that we published in July was squarely based on all
:10:02. > :10:07.of the evidence available, and was correct in saying that her voice
:10:07. > :10:10.mail had been deleted, and it remains the case, that News
:10:10. > :10:14.International are not denying that News of the World journalists may
:10:14. > :10:18.have been responsible for those deletions. Let's put it up on the
:10:18. > :10:22.wall. You are missing the point. The audience can judge for
:10:22. > :10:26.themselves. Let's look at the front page. News of the World hacking
:10:27. > :10:31.Milly Dowler's phone during police hunt. Then it is "paper deleted
:10:31. > :10:35.missing schoolgirl's voice mails giving the family false hope", you
:10:35. > :10:38.say the messages were deleted by journalists in the first few days
:10:38. > :10:43.after Milly's disappearance. You don't know that. You are getting
:10:43. > :10:45.the problem slightly wrong, you have misunderstood it. The problem
:10:45. > :10:48.was whether or not they were responsible for deleting the
:10:48. > :10:51.particular messages that caused the friends and family to have false
:10:51. > :10:56.hope. That is now in doubt. If you just follow what is going through
:10:56. > :11:01.here I will explain. Do you know for a fact what you state as a fact
:11:01. > :11:04.in this article? Everybody who was involved in that story accepted it
:11:04. > :11:08.was true. It is very interesting that when that story was
:11:08. > :11:12.published...you are not allowing me to answer. No I'm not, you are not
:11:12. > :11:19.answering. You have asked the wrong question, you see. I'm so sorry.
:11:19. > :11:22.You have misunderstood the problem. I want to answer it. Was it true?
:11:22. > :11:26.That story was, everybody involved with that story believed it was
:11:26. > :11:30.true. The day after I published that story I sat down for two hours
:11:31. > :11:35.with Glenn Mulcaire, the private investigator at the centre of this
:11:35. > :11:44.thing. He issued an apology, he didn't disagrow with a single word,
:11:44. > :11:47.News International didn't deny it. You stated it as a fact rather than
:11:47. > :11:51.a police belief? Everybody involved in that story accepted that story
:11:51. > :11:55.was true, and continued to accept it, until, four months later, new
:11:55. > :11:59.evidence that was not available to everybody's surprise, showed that
:11:59. > :12:03.one element of that story is now in doubt. It has not been proved to be
:12:03. > :12:07.true. It is a key element. Just like Mark Lewis said, it is in
:12:07. > :12:10.doubt. You don't report it as a belief, you report it as a fact?
:12:10. > :12:16.And everybody accepted that it was true. The police accepted it in
:12:16. > :12:21.London and in Surrey, Mulcaire, the private investigator, News
:12:21. > :12:25.International. It had the same level of certainty. It clearly
:12:25. > :12:28.wasn't a fact, you have just conceded it wasn't a fact, you said
:12:28. > :12:34.people thought it was true? They accepted it was true, nobody
:12:34. > :12:38.dissented from it. New evidence, not available at that time. In
:12:38. > :12:41.retrospect it is now in doubt. They are not saying it isn't true. You
:12:41. > :12:48.are still getting it wrong. They are saying it is conceivable but
:12:48. > :12:54.unlikely that the News of the World was responsible for that particular
:12:54. > :12:58.deletion. It was an allegation he repeated 34 times as well. This
:12:58. > :13:02.wasn't any old story, this was the story that was the most important
:13:02. > :13:06.story in the Guardian's history. It was vital every single element of
:13:06. > :13:12.it should be right. Let's get things in proportion, your
:13:12. > :13:15.newspaper had hacked a murdered girl's telephone? I'm not here, I
:13:15. > :13:20.don't believe the News of the World has been exonerated. What we did
:13:20. > :13:24.was indefensible, not just to Milly, but all the victims of hacking, I'm
:13:24. > :13:30.not here to justify that, I'm here to attack the shoddy journalism of
:13:30. > :13:37.the Gardiner and Nick. He said it was -- of the Guardian and nick. He
:13:37. > :13:40.said it was believed by everyone to be true, there was a statement by
:13:40. > :13:43.News International at the end saying we are looking into it. They
:13:43. > :13:49.were a rabbit caught in headlights, they had been caught out misleading
:13:49. > :13:53.people with the one rogue reporter theory, we weren't going to make
:13:53. > :13:57.that mistake again. They weren't confirming anything to anyone.
:13:57. > :14:02.you think they should have been closed down? I'm not here to defend
:14:02. > :14:06.the News of the World, I'm here to atact Nick's journalism, it is not
:14:06. > :14:12.just down to this story. Just a week later after this sensational
:14:12. > :14:18.claim, he claims, in a front page story again, that the Sun hacked
:14:18. > :14:21.into Gordon Brown's medical records to reveal his son's cystic fibrosis.
:14:21. > :14:27.The Gardiner did apologise for that story. That could have had the same
:14:27. > :14:31.effect on the Sun that Milly had on the News of the World. This man
:14:31. > :14:39.accused widespread criminality at your newspaper, he should be
:14:39. > :14:43.applauded for that? There is parts of the Guardian investigation that
:14:43. > :14:49.is great, but the other media, which has treated what the Guardian
:14:49. > :14:54.has said as fact, for the last five months, it is only now that that
:14:54. > :14:58.the Guardian's journalism is coming under scrutiny. A lot was fact?
:14:58. > :15:02.lot was fact, but there was significant smears and untruths.
:15:02. > :15:06.have published more than a hundred stories revealing immoral, criminal
:15:06. > :15:09.behaviour by the newspaper where you worked for 15 years. Just look,
:15:09. > :15:13.for example, at the Gordon Brown story which you have just raised.
:15:13. > :15:17.Gordon Brown's wife Sarah gave birth to a child, the doctors said
:15:17. > :15:21.this child appears to have a very serious illness wrecks need more
:15:21. > :15:24.tests. During that period when they were waiting to confirm it, the
:15:24. > :15:29.Sun's discovered the confidential information about this sick boy.
:15:29. > :15:32.Any decent newspaper would say we can't publish this, that newspaper
:15:32. > :15:35.chose to. That put enormous stress on those parents. I have
:15:35. > :15:41.interviewed Gordon Brown on the record. He says when the Sun
:15:41. > :15:45.decided to publish that information, he and Sarah Brown were in tears.
:15:45. > :15:52.Subsequently we published a story about it, we didn't say the Sun
:15:52. > :15:54.obtained that Bihacing, you have just made that up. Let me finish.
:15:54. > :15:59.The Sun gained access to confidential medical information,
:15:59. > :16:02.at one point in the story I used a different term of words, I said
:16:02. > :16:07."gained access to confidential medical records", I couldn't prove
:16:07. > :16:11.they got to the file. This is the difference. The Guardian corrected
:16:11. > :16:17.and apologised that. When did the Sun apologiseor doing that cruel
:16:17. > :16:22.and inhumane thing to those parents whose sick child will grow up and
:16:22. > :16:26.discover all these horrible stories about his past. I'm not here to
:16:26. > :16:31.defend the ethics of the Sun and the News of the World, I'm here to
:16:31. > :16:35.take the shoddy journalism of the Guardian. You have misrepresented
:16:35. > :16:40.what we said in the Gordon Brown story, it is a matter of wording.
:16:40. > :16:44.On the Gordon Brown story. don't you apologiseor it. You have
:16:44. > :16:50.never apologised for the terrible things. Words matter. We have
:16:50. > :16:54.apologised for it on this show, and every senior executive has
:16:54. > :17:01.apologised, Rupert Murdoch said it was the most humble day of his life.
:17:01. > :17:05.Where is your humility in this. have huge humility, I'm not saying
:17:05. > :17:11.we are exonerated in any way. are in a heap of trouble, for years
:17:11. > :17:14.you have taken Murdoch's money and invaded and ruined people's lives,
:17:14. > :17:18.and engaged in criminal activity. You have had private investigators
:17:18. > :17:22.who have broken the law, haven't you, would you like a list of the
:17:22. > :17:26.people. Let's go through the lists of the hundreds of Observer
:17:26. > :17:30.journalists that made requests. hired a private investigator who
:17:30. > :17:35.was doing illegal things to get information, isn't that true. Why
:17:35. > :17:39.won't you admit the truth, isn't it time for some humility. Didn't you
:17:39. > :17:44.hire a private investigator. the Observer journalist doss it,
:17:44. > :17:48.and the current Guardian journalists. You accuse me of
:17:48. > :17:52.shoddy journalism, and your name is all over of a private investigator
:17:52. > :18:00.convicted of using illegal means, information about Anne Robinson,
:18:00. > :18:04.about John Penros and Anna Friel. Let's name some of the Garden
:18:04. > :18:08.journalists. I want to broaden this and move it on. Anne Diamond you
:18:08. > :18:12.have personal experience of being on the receiving end of this sort
:18:12. > :18:18.of attention from the tabloid press. You had a personal tragedy with
:18:18. > :18:21.your child. Tell us what happened? I must say I just find it
:18:21. > :18:24.unbelievable that anyone from the News of the World can sit there and
:18:24. > :18:28.be outraipbled that somebody might have got a fact wrong, that
:18:28. > :18:32.somebody might have misrepresented them in some way, that someone
:18:32. > :18:37.might not have apologised fully. That is incredible to hear. Now you
:18:37. > :18:41.now what it feels like. My particular story then, according to
:18:41. > :18:45.Rupert Murdoch's butler, I was targeted by News International in a
:18:45. > :18:50.very early stage, because I took Rupert Murdoch to task for the
:18:50. > :18:56.behaviour for some of his newspapers. It came to a head when
:18:56. > :19:01.1991 my little boy died. We knew, my husband and I knew that we knew
:19:01. > :19:06.the level of press interest there would be. Mindful of the fact that
:19:06. > :19:12.Eric Clapton son's had died a year before, and the funeral had become
:19:12. > :19:17.a press circus. Newspaper photographers and reporters were
:19:17. > :19:23.falling over other people's gravestones and trampling flowers
:19:23. > :19:27.to get a picture of Eric and his girlfriend at the funeral. We wrote
:19:27. > :19:31.to every Fleet Street editor and said please stay away, this is an
:19:31. > :19:37.incredibly private moment. A photographer did turn up. Within a
:19:37. > :19:41.couple of hours of the funeral, my husband was rung by the editor of
:19:41. > :19:44.the Sun, and they said we have a photograph, it is incredibly strong
:19:44. > :19:50.we want to use it. My husband begged them not to use it. They ran
:19:50. > :19:53.it all over the front page the next day. What has gone wrong in the
:19:53. > :19:58.culture of the media in this country? It is partially
:19:59. > :20:01.commercially run riot, to sell papers, it is partly this deeply
:20:01. > :20:05.self-perceived culture in the paper that everything we do is right, we
:20:05. > :20:12.are above the law. It doesn't matter if the High Courts say it is
:20:12. > :20:16.a grotesque invasion of Max Mosley's privacy. They have set the
:20:16. > :20:21.agenda for themselves for so many years, we live in a press world now
:20:21. > :20:27.where the climate, the values have been distorted by the worst
:20:27. > :20:29.journalists there. I'm a journalist myself, I'm a print journalist by
:20:29. > :20:33.training, I'm ashamed of the some of the things they have done. They
:20:34. > :20:38.have been allowed so long it has set the climate. How can you live
:20:38. > :20:42.in it? I won't justify what happened to Anne. I'm as moved and
:20:42. > :20:47.upset by what she's saying as anyone else. It happened 20 years
:20:47. > :20:52.ago. This is one thing t happened over a long period. I am not alone.
:20:52. > :20:56.You are the features editor of the News of the World, how does it
:20:56. > :21:00.feel? There is lots of fantastic public interest journalism we did.
:21:00. > :21:06.Nobody disputes that? Things went wrong. I'm not here to justify what
:21:06. > :21:09.happened to Anne 20 years ago at the hands of the Sun under a
:21:09. > :21:13.completely previous regime. And the News of the World, not just the Sun
:21:13. > :21:19.or the News of the World. It was a culture you guys were allowed to
:21:19. > :21:28.set. What was it went wrong? People made mistakes, there is no doubt
:21:28. > :21:30.about it. This was industrial scale phone hacking? I'm not here to
:21:30. > :21:34.justify that, I don't think the News of the World has been
:21:34. > :21:38.exonerated. I think, you can justify the closure of the paper,
:21:38. > :21:42.even. I'm not here to do that. I was here to talk about the Guardian
:21:42. > :21:46.getting things wrong and the Guardian misrepresenting. Now you
:21:46. > :21:49.know how it feels. Just a little tiny glimmer, that is all you are
:21:49. > :21:52.getting of what you have put other people through for many, many years,
:21:52. > :21:56.now you know how it feels. It feels a sense of moral outrage. That is
:21:56. > :22:01.what I see from you today. And that's what so many people have
:22:01. > :22:07.felt for so long. You are still playing the same tabloid distortion
:22:07. > :22:10.game. We publish more than 100 stories, confirmed in evidence by
:22:10. > :22:14.police and inquiries and in civil actions and you pick on two error,
:22:14. > :22:17.one of them very significant in the Milly Dowler story, one of them
:22:17. > :22:22.really minor in the Gordon Brown story, and you distort the truth
:22:22. > :22:27.and try to pretend that means we are guilty of shoddy journalism.
:22:27. > :22:32.least you are accepting the errors. The distortion is wrong. Take a
:22:32. > :22:35.leaf out of Rupert Murdoch's book and get humble, or go quiet, people
:22:35. > :22:40.don't believe you any more. We will not be bullied by people like you
:22:40. > :22:43.any more, we have had enough of you. You have just taken over as head of
:22:43. > :22:49.the Press Complaints Commission, it is a hopeless task, isn't it?
:22:49. > :22:53.of all, you have to recognise that the press is not being regulated.
:22:53. > :22:58.The body I have inherited, the Press Complaints Commission has no
:22:58. > :23:02.regulatory powers at all. I come in as a lawyer, specialising in
:23:02. > :23:06.regulation, everyone I say this to agrees. So we don't have a system
:23:06. > :23:12.at the moment. I have resolved that we will now have a system and it is
:23:12. > :23:17.up to me to put it forward. How are you going to do it? First
:23:17. > :23:21.of all, listening to the tragic stories, coming out of not just
:23:21. > :23:25.Lord Justice Leveson. You haven't got teeth? Listening to the tragic
:23:25. > :23:28.stories, like the ones we have just heard, and acknowledging, as I
:23:28. > :23:34.think, all of us would, that we are proud of the freedom of the press
:23:34. > :23:38.in this country. We are proud of investigative journalism, Anne
:23:38. > :23:41.knows that a number of stories came in behind causes that she was
:23:41. > :23:45.pushing. So we have to preserve that. But we have to have some
:23:45. > :23:50.regulation, we have to have some standards. That is going to be my
:23:50. > :23:56.job, to find a way of persuading people, not just in parliament, not
:23:56. > :24:01.just in the press but the public, that we can have a system of self-
:24:01. > :24:04.regulation of the press. Do you believe in self-regulation? No, I
:24:04. > :24:08.don't. All the years I have spent, when I went into broadcast
:24:08. > :24:12.journalism in the end. I used to think why is there one set of rules
:24:12. > :24:17.for the press and another set of rules entirely for broadcast
:24:17. > :24:19.journalists. Broadcast journalists are still able to do fantastic
:24:19. > :24:25.investigative journalism, wonderful campaigning, the standard of
:24:25. > :24:29.journalism is still very high in the BBC and elsewhere. Are you in
:24:29. > :24:33.favour of a Ofcom for newspapers? think so, for the press. The power
:24:33. > :24:37.to fine the stories? The popular press have nothing to fear from
:24:37. > :24:41.this. They need to embrace it. We could all pull up the standards of
:24:41. > :24:45.the popular press in this country. Not through statute, I don't like
:24:45. > :24:49.the idea of putting the press in the hands of the politicians.
:24:49. > :24:53.have had 20-odd years of self- regulation, and it hasn't worked.
:24:53. > :24:56.We had the press council before that, that didn't work either.
:24:56. > :25:01.don't think we have ever had proper regulatory control, even from
:25:01. > :25:05.within the press, or even from independent sources. Do you worry
:25:05. > :25:09.about what some of the consequences may be. The consequences for
:25:09. > :25:12.investigative journalism for a free press? There has been some nasty
:25:12. > :25:16.backlash and bad ideas put about. There has been a crackdown within
:25:16. > :25:18.police forces to try to stop any kind of unauthorised contact
:25:18. > :25:21.between police officers and journalists. That is a very, very
:25:21. > :25:25.bad move. I don't want to live in a world where the only information we
:25:25. > :25:28.can get out of a police force or Government department is what is
:25:28. > :25:32.authorised by the boss. That is the kind of information tyranny that
:25:32. > :25:37.you create. Unauthorised contact is central to the free press. So there
:25:37. > :25:40.are nasty bits of backlash going on. That is not to deny the problem. I
:25:40. > :25:43.have stopped believing in the self- regulation of the press.
:25:43. > :25:47.Principally because of the grotesque failure of the PCC over
:25:47. > :25:55.the phone hacking scandal. Twice they produced report, my editor
:25:55. > :25:59.described them as "worse than useless" that was kind. There was a
:25:59. > :26:03.structural failure in there. This is not a bunch of starchy nannies
:26:03. > :26:08.sitting around in Holland Park eating digestive biscuits and
:26:08. > :26:10.hoping they are obeying the rules, this is a deeply competitive
:26:10. > :26:14.industry, routinely breaking the law and stabbing each other's backs
:26:14. > :26:20.in order to sell newspapers. You are not interested in being
:26:20. > :26:25.regulated are you. Let's pause for a moment, you condemn the PCC, many
:26:25. > :26:28.people have, and have said it many times. I look at the PCC and say to
:26:28. > :26:34.myself what regulatory powers does it have. What powers of
:26:34. > :26:40.investigation? The answer is none. In a way the PCC is being judged by
:26:40. > :26:45.powers that it never had. I have got to work out how we can have
:26:45. > :26:50.shows powers, within an independent, self-regulatory system, that is
:26:50. > :26:54.what I have set my task to do. investigation and enforcement,
:26:54. > :26:58.there are two different problems to get to the truth and enforce.
:26:58. > :27:02.reconvene this later. It is a truth universally
:27:02. > :27:07.acknowledged that the weekly Punch and Judy show in Westminster has
:27:07. > :27:09.taken a lot more seriously by the political masters than normal human
:27:09. > :27:12.beings. How they perform at Prime Minister's Questions, and it was
:27:12. > :27:16.the last of the year today, can determine whether a party leader
:27:16. > :27:19.lives or dies. Today, given what he obviously thought was a golden
:27:19. > :27:24.opportunity, Ed Milliband was left looking like a man who chooses his
:27:24. > :27:31.best suit and tie for a job interview, and then enters the room
:27:31. > :27:35.realising he has forgotten to put his trousers on.
:27:35. > :27:41.Hi everybody. Hi daddy. Apparently when Ed Milliband goes to the
:27:41. > :27:46.United States, he gets mistaken for this chap, star of the hit HBO
:27:46. > :27:52.comedy, Everbody Loves Raymond. And, well, you can kind of see why.
:27:52. > :27:55.was your day? There was, though, no mistakes Mr Miliband for a comedian
:27:55. > :28:01.today. His attempted gag ended up coming right back at him.
:28:01. > :28:04.Let me say, it is good to see the Deputy Prime Minister back among us.
:28:04. > :28:08.The Labour leader might have thought he had some promising
:28:08. > :28:16.material to work with, after the row between the PM and his deputy
:28:16. > :28:21.over the EU veto. Calm down, calm down. This is what he said, this is
:28:21. > :28:24.what he said in his new year's message for 2011, I will place a
:28:24. > :28:29.copy in the library of the House, Mr Speaker, just so everyone can
:28:29. > :28:35.see it. This is what he said, "coalition politics is not always
:28:35. > :28:45.straight forward, but I believe we are bringing in a whole new style
:28:45. > :28:47.
:28:47. > :28:51.of Government ". Mr Speaker there is more, there is more. "a more
:28:51. > :28:57.collegiate approach", Mr Speaker, I'm bound to ask, what has gone
:28:57. > :29:02.wrong. I will answer. I will answer. Look,
:29:02. > :29:07.look, no-one in this House is going to be surprised that Conservatives
:29:07. > :29:12.and Liberal Democrats don't always agree about Europe. But let me
:29:12. > :29:17.reassure him, he shouldn't believe everything he reads in the papers.
:29:17. > :29:27.No, it is not that bad, I mean it is not like we're brothers or
:29:27. > :29:38.
:29:38. > :29:44.anything! More. More. He certainly walked into that one.
:29:44. > :29:48.Mr Speaker, Mr Speaker, ...The Labour leader did the best to
:29:48. > :29:52.recover, but you could see the pain all over the faces on the Labour
:29:52. > :29:56.benches. Of course anyone can have a bad
:29:56. > :30:00.PMQs, but the worry concerning Labour MPs as they head towards the
:30:00. > :30:03.Christmas holiday is this. With the economy flatlining, the
:30:03. > :30:08.Government's deficit reduction programme not working, and public
:30:08. > :30:13.splits in the coalition that you could comfortably drive a bus
:30:13. > :30:17.through, why on earth aren't we doing a whole lot better. Dan
:30:17. > :30:21.Hodges used to be an adviser to the Labour Party. Today's PMQ was bad
:30:21. > :30:23.for Ed Milliband, but the key turning point was the Autumn
:30:23. > :30:27.Statement. Labour MPs were hoping and praying that would be the
:30:27. > :30:33.moment where the public rumbled what they see as the George Osborne
:30:33. > :30:38.failed economic strategy, and start to embrace Labour's, the reverse is
:30:38. > :30:41.the case. The Tories are increased their lead in terms of economic
:30:42. > :30:45.competence, and eradicated Labour's opinion poll lead. That is the
:30:45. > :30:48.thing that is really now terrifying Labour MPs. What they are saying,
:30:48. > :30:53.is we can't beat the Tories and get a significant lead over the Tories
:30:53. > :30:58.now, with this cascade of bad news, how are we going to do it in two or
:30:58. > :31:03.three years time when the economy, even sluggishly starting to improve.
:31:03. > :31:08.Indeed the polls at the moment are no joke for Ray's British lookalike,
:31:08. > :31:12.everybody, it seems, does not love Ed. When compared with other
:31:12. > :31:18.leaders of the opposition, Ed Milliband's net approval rating is
:31:18. > :31:21.worse than David Cameron or Tony Blair's were at at this point. Only
:31:21. > :31:26.Iain Duncan Smith, Michael Howard, and William Hague did worse, and
:31:26. > :31:32.they never made it to Number Ten. When you look at how his polling
:31:33. > :31:38.splits up, it is clear what happens. A large number of the "don't knows"
:31:38. > :31:42.at the start of the Miliband leadership has disappeared, but
:31:42. > :31:46.they have decided they don't like him. What sort of qualities do the
:31:46. > :31:50.public see as Ed Milliband possessing or not possessing?
:31:50. > :31:55.one area where he still scores reasonably well is being regarded
:31:55. > :31:59.in touch with ordinary people, not too bad on honesty. Where his
:31:59. > :32:04.ratings really fall down are things like being strong, decisive, good
:32:04. > :32:08.in a crisis, a the natural qualities of a leader. Those
:32:08. > :32:13.figures are really very low. It is very hard to win an election in
:32:14. > :32:19.opposition with a leader with those kinds of scores.
:32:19. > :32:24.That is what I was going to say. too. I'm sorry. Maybe the Labour
:32:24. > :32:30.leader should take some solace from regime mond, he may get in a few
:32:30. > :32:35.scrapes but he -- Raymond, but he may get into a couple of scrapes
:32:35. > :32:40.but he usual comes good in the end. Hilary Benn is with us. Do you
:32:40. > :32:45.think he's doing a good job? I do. Why isn't he more popular? Look we
:32:46. > :32:51.had our second worst election defeat in 2010. If you reflect on
:32:51. > :32:54.what's happened since then, we have 65,000 more members, 850 more
:32:54. > :32:57.councillors. We have won four by- elections, but it is a long haul.
:32:57. > :33:01.Why not polling better than the Conservatives, unemployment is
:33:01. > :33:04.rising, the economic strategy is not working, the Prime Minister has
:33:04. > :33:07.delivered something the Deputy Prime Minister has said is bad for
:33:08. > :33:11.Britain? Most of the years you know we have been ahead in the polls.
:33:11. > :33:14.You are not now? No, and there may be a short-term effect from what
:33:14. > :33:20.happened last week. In the end it is the character of leaders that
:33:21. > :33:24.will win out. And David Cameron's problem is that he his economic
:33:24. > :33:28.policy is not working, as is now evident, and the British public are
:33:28. > :33:33.beginning to see that, but it will take time for the full failure of
:33:33. > :33:36.that to become clear. Let's discuss David Cameron's problems with unof
:33:36. > :33:39.his friends, you are Ed Milliband's friend and I want to talk about his
:33:39. > :33:43.problems with you. How is it that a third of Labour voters are
:33:43. > :33:48.dissatisfied with his performance? Look, the country is going through
:33:48. > :33:54.a tough time. We lost an election. What happened in the past is bound
:33:54. > :33:59.to be reflected in part, in how people perceive Labour now. But,
:33:59. > :34:06.really important questions are, who is thinking about the future of the
:34:06. > :34:09.country. So you assert...I'm Reflecting on the riveting item on
:34:09. > :34:12.the programme there. Who demonstrated courage in the course
:34:12. > :34:15.of the year in taking on News International, breaking with the
:34:15. > :34:19.politic consensus there for a very long time, it was Ed Milliband, and
:34:19. > :34:23.David Cameron was left following in his wake. You must acknowledge that.
:34:23. > :34:27.In the interests of clarity, can you tell us what your position is
:34:27. > :34:31.then on David Cameron's wielding of the veto in Brussels the other
:34:31. > :34:35.night? Well it wasn't a veto was it. I will tell you what our position
:34:35. > :34:40.is, a veto is intended to stop something happening. You would have
:34:40. > :34:43.signed the pact would you? there wasn't a treaty. Is there a
:34:43. > :34:46.treaty, I don't know if Newsnight has hold of a copy of the treaty.
:34:46. > :34:49.The right thing for the Prime Minister to have done would be to
:34:49. > :34:53.stay in the room, make sure British interests are protected and the
:34:53. > :34:56.truth is, he has walked away. These negotiations will continue and
:34:56. > :35:00.Britain will not be there. We have handed over, actually, power to the
:35:00. > :35:06.French and Germans, that is a reflection of his weak negotiating
:35:06. > :35:11.position and the fact he's derfied of his backbenchers. If --
:35:11. > :35:15.Terrified of his backbenchers. your leader was Prime Minister,
:35:15. > :35:18.what would we have agreed to? would have put in the work before
:35:18. > :35:21.the negotiations, there is no good in turning up as the Prime Minister
:35:21. > :35:24.and throwing down some demands and saying if you don't agree I'm off.
:35:24. > :35:28.We should be there trying to protect British interests. Would
:35:28. > :35:33.you have agreed to the treaty changes or not? There isn't a
:35:33. > :35:37.treaty in place, there isn't even a draft treaty, is there. If Britain
:35:38. > :35:41.had agreed it, there would have been a draft treaty? There is not a
:35:41. > :35:45.draft treaty. Clearly there isn't now? Now they will have to
:35:45. > :35:49.negotiate it. This will happen over the next few months. That is a
:35:49. > :35:54.position Ed Milliband would have put us in? We need to be there to
:35:54. > :35:57.protect British interests, no party leader will agree to anything not
:35:57. > :36:01.in the British interests. By absenting himself he has put
:36:01. > :36:06.Britain in a difficult and dangerous position. Your's is a
:36:06. > :36:09.kind of in and out position, the hokey cokey approach? It is not, it
:36:09. > :36:13.is about defending the national interest, but making sure we are
:36:13. > :36:17.there at the table. You cannot do that if you are not part of the
:36:17. > :36:20.negotiation. Isn't the truth that the only thing we know about Ed
:36:20. > :36:26.Milliband is his struggle with his brother, that is why David
:36:26. > :36:29.Cameron's joke worked so well? microclimate of Westminster people
:36:29. > :36:34.can laugh at Prime Minister's Questions. It is the only thing
:36:34. > :36:41.they know about him? David Cameron remind me of other Conservative
:36:41. > :36:44.leaders, he has bad judgment and good jokes. Ed Milliband is the
:36:44. > :36:48.only one thinking about the future of the country, what we will do
:36:48. > :36:51.once the deficit is dealt with. He understands the change that brought
:36:51. > :36:55.about the economic crisis we face, that is what the speech to
:36:55. > :36:58.conference was about this year. A lot of people are saying he's on to
:36:58. > :37:02.something. You will stick to him through thick and thin? I certainly
:37:02. > :37:06.will, I backed him from the start. He showed courage and determination,
:37:06. > :37:10.he doesn't flinch when the going is tough, he's the right person to
:37:10. > :37:13.lead us into the next election and he will.
:37:13. > :37:18.President Obama thanked American troops for their service in Iraq
:37:18. > :37:23.today. A symbolic end to the deployment of combat forces there.
:37:23. > :37:28.This dumb war, as Obama called it, has cost America the lives of 4,500
:37:28. > :37:35.of its citizens, to say nothing of over a trillion dollars in cash and
:37:35. > :37:38.the lives of uncounted Iraq year, all to destroy the regime of a man
:37:39. > :37:46.who turned out not to have weapons of mass destruction and not to be
:37:46. > :37:51.backing Al-Qaeda. Where does this campaign leave American power.
:37:51. > :37:56.It has been an odyssey of pain, division, and as far as the US
:37:56. > :38:02.troops were concerned, unbending commitment. But America's war in
:38:02. > :38:06.Iraq is over. And the President who opposed it today tried to find the
:38:06. > :38:13.right words for those who is predecessor had sent into harm's
:38:13. > :38:17.way. It is harder to end a war than begin one. Indeed, everything that
:38:17. > :38:22.American troops have done in Iraq. All the fighting, and all the dying,
:38:22. > :38:28.the bleeding, and the building and the training and the partnering,
:38:28. > :38:33.all of it has led to this moment of success.
:38:33. > :38:37.Until even a few weeks ago it was assumed that a few thousand US
:38:37. > :38:41.troops would remain to assist the Iraqis with special counciller
:38:41. > :38:45.terrorist operations. As it became apparent that -- counter terrorist
:38:45. > :38:49.operations. As it became apparent that negotiations to secure this
:38:49. > :38:54.had failed, there was fury on the right, that is those who believed
:38:54. > :38:58.it was worth fighting accused the administration of squandering its
:38:58. > :39:03.sacrifices. The truth is, this administration was committed to the
:39:03. > :39:06.complete withdrawal of US troops in Iraq and they made it happen.
:39:06. > :39:11.Senator McCain that is simply not true. I guess you can believe that,
:39:11. > :39:15.and I respect your beliefs. respect your opinion, but the
:39:15. > :39:21.outcome has been exactly as predicted. That is not how it
:39:21. > :39:26.happened. It is how it happened. This is about negotiating with the
:39:26. > :39:29.sovereign country. An independent country, this was about their needs.
:39:29. > :39:35.The view that the biggest beneficiary from the past nine
:39:35. > :39:38.years has been Iran has currency on the other side of the political
:39:38. > :39:42.argument too. They believe that President Bush's invasion destroyed
:39:42. > :39:47.the peace of Iraq, and has allowed the country's neighbour to benefit
:39:47. > :39:57.in all sorts of ways. There was a long standing expectation, going
:39:57. > :39:59.
:39:59. > :40:06.back at least to the 1980s, that a relatively powerful Iraq posed a
:40:06. > :40:11.necessary bulwark to prevent Iranian expansionism into the Arab
:40:11. > :40:16.world. Well that bulwark has now been seriously weakened as a
:40:16. > :40:23.consequence of the US intervention. Of course, the enormous cost of
:40:23. > :40:28.Iraq has had a deterrent effect on future intervention abroad. Almost
:40:28. > :40:33.4,500 US soldiers killed, more than 32,000 wounded, and some of these
:40:33. > :40:40.figures are controversial, something approaching 150,000
:40:40. > :40:45.Iraqis, who have died in the violence, and a bill of more than
:40:46. > :40:50.$1 trillion. The US made disastrous mistakes at the start, but they did
:40:50. > :40:58.learn quickly. With new tactics and a troop securing, at least they
:40:58. > :41:02.were able to pre-- surge, at least they were able to prevent civil war.
:41:02. > :41:08.The US forces to maintain a sense of discipline and cohesion, over
:41:08. > :41:14.the course of these many years of combat, really is remarkable.
:41:14. > :41:19.On the other hand, if we evaluate the performance of senior military
:41:19. > :41:22.leaders, the people at three and four-star ranks, those who have
:41:22. > :41:30.managed the war in Iraq, and are managing the war in Afghanistan
:41:30. > :41:33.there, it seems to me, that there is considerable work to be done.
:41:33. > :41:38.Falluja, where the Americans used their greatest force, there was
:41:38. > :41:41.relief today that it was all over. Most Iraqis supported American
:41:42. > :41:44.withdrawal, and will be glad for an end to what they regarded as
:41:45. > :41:48.occupation. But, a few hundred US advisers
:41:48. > :41:53.remain in a training role, and the two countries are vowing to
:41:54. > :41:57.continue strategic co-operation. If you look at the demand for
:41:57. > :42:02.energy in the future, and Iraq's capacity to meet some of that
:42:02. > :42:06.demand, as significant as that is, frankly, not to mention the fact
:42:06. > :42:10.that we are sitting on the western flank of a potentially nuclear
:42:10. > :42:14.armed Iran. When you stop and think about it from a strategic
:42:14. > :42:18.standpoint, it is maizeing how important this stick country is in
:42:18. > :42:23.this -- amazing how important this particular country is in this
:42:23. > :42:28.particular region. What remains at the end of this fight, a fractious
:42:28. > :42:33.Iraq, in a dangerous region, and the United States chastened by the
:42:33. > :42:38.sacrifice and force of unintended consequences, trying to forget the
:42:38. > :42:40.enormous cost of what it did. To discuss the state of the
:42:40. > :42:49.American foreign policy, from Stanford University, we are joined
:42:49. > :42:56.by the former Bush policy adviser, and from New York, we are joined by
:42:56. > :42:59.Ian Bremmre, er, President of the - - Bremer. Do you think the United
:42:59. > :43:03.States, which leaves Iraq, is the United States, in any sense, in
:43:03. > :43:09.terms of power, that went into Iraq? Oh sure, I think it is the
:43:09. > :43:14.same in lots of senses. But I agree with the point of your question
:43:14. > :43:19.which is that the costs of the Iraq war for the United States have been
:43:19. > :43:23.so significant that I think it is quite unlikely we will choose to
:43:23. > :43:29.solve problems elsewhere that they have solved by force in Iraq.
:43:29. > :43:34.Do you see it the same way? More or less. I mean the United States has
:43:34. > :43:37.the capacity if it wants to engage in your Iraq, even economically,
:43:37. > :43:42.but there is no way Americans would support it. Libya is a much better
:43:42. > :43:46.example of what the United States is doing militarily nowadays. It
:43:46. > :43:51.was only after the Saudis, the Arab League came at the Americans and
:43:51. > :43:55.said plos get involved, and then the French and then the Brits, and
:43:55. > :43:58.only then did the Americans say yes, but only with all of these
:43:58. > :44:02.conditions. That is much more of the military engagment you will see.
:44:02. > :44:07.Keep in mind Obama still has to leave Afghanistan. He won't be
:44:07. > :44:12.giving the kind of speech in 2014 on Afghanistan, if he's around,
:44:12. > :44:16.that you saw him giving on Iraq today. Here in Europe, Libya is
:44:16. > :44:20.seen as primarily seen as a European-led military mission,
:44:20. > :44:24.which involved very, very troops on the ground. How do you see the
:44:24. > :44:30.United States trying to prosecute its military and political mission
:44:31. > :44:35.abroad in future? Well I think if you look at the way the United
:44:35. > :44:41.States has engaged problems of terrorist threats in Yemen, in the
:44:41. > :44:46.Horn of Africa, and in other places, what the Obama administration's
:44:46. > :44:51.strategy is focusing on is fewer troops on the ground. Lots of
:44:51. > :44:57.intelligence information provieed by people living in the countries,
:44:57. > :45:00.lots of surveillance information provided by the United States over
:45:00. > :45:04.flying those countries, and precision strikes. That is good at
:45:04. > :45:08.killing terrorists, it is not good at changing the way the people who
:45:08. > :45:18.live in this country feel about their vulnerability to us attacking
:45:18. > :45:24.
:45:24. > :45:28.them. It is good for one piece of the country but not good for all.
:45:28. > :45:34.What came away from the film I just heard was the sense that Iran is
:45:34. > :45:40.being emboldened by the fact that the United States has pulled out,
:45:40. > :45:43.Hussein isn't there. Iran's political position isn't an
:45:43. > :45:47.advantageous one, Syria, Bashar al- Assad is literally on his last legs
:45:47. > :45:52.and surrounded regionally and internationally, that will cause
:45:52. > :45:58.problems for Iran and Lebanon as well. The GCC, Saudi Arabia, having
:45:58. > :46:03.a much pronk stronger role on the gulf operation council, co-
:46:03. > :46:07.ordinating countries which have tilted more closely to Iran. Iran
:46:07. > :46:12.has problems internally between the Supreme Leader and the President.
:46:12. > :46:16.There is no question that Iranians want a bigger influence in Iraq. I
:46:16. > :46:21.see the problem with Iraq is major defragmentisingation and
:46:21. > :46:24.decentralisation, with the Kurds and the Sunnis wanting their more
:46:24. > :46:28.autonomous region, and the Shia, that is more of a problem. I don't
:46:28. > :46:33.see Iran becoming a mass of political threat because of Iraq.
:46:33. > :46:36.Isn't it a lot more difficult for the ufpl states to intervene abroad,
:46:36. > :46:39.given the state -- the United States to intervene abroad, given
:46:39. > :46:44.the state of the feeling about the United States in the rest of the
:46:44. > :46:48.world? Yeah, I do think it would be more difficult for the President to
:46:48. > :46:51.encourage public support for major interventions overseas. I think
:46:51. > :46:55.part of the reason that President Obama was so hesitant to go to
:46:55. > :47:01.Congress for authorisation for the use of force in the Libya campaign,
:47:01. > :47:04.for example s that he didn't want to risk public reaction to it. So I
:47:04. > :47:07.do think there is a hesitancy on the part of the American people. I
:47:07. > :47:11.would say that is ameanable to leadership. And when it matters for
:47:11. > :47:15.the United States to use force to protect and advance its interests,
:47:15. > :47:22.it is the President's job to build public support for that. The other
:47:22. > :47:27.thing it is ameanable to, is events. Who would have predicted, I know
:47:27. > :47:29.9/11 was predicted, but George Bush did not set out to have a major
:47:29. > :47:34.interventionist policy overseas during his presidency, 9/11 changed
:47:34. > :47:40.all of that, didn't it? That is certainly true. The 9/11 era is
:47:40. > :47:44.over. We saw that also with Bin Laden. I think that one of the big
:47:44. > :47:50.ships we have seen has been -- shifts we have seen, is the United
:47:50. > :47:54.States now focusing on Asia, not on the Middle East. That is a place
:47:54. > :48:00.given the concerns on China on both sides of the electoral divide. You
:48:00. > :48:03.will see the United States being more actively involved, several
:48:03. > :48:06.administrations has been you cut your teeth on the Middle East live
:48:06. > :48:09.or die. This administration has decided that is not where they are
:48:09. > :48:12.going to be. They will get a lot of international support among Asian
:48:12. > :48:22.allies for that. Thank you very much indeed.
:48:22. > :48:33.
:48:33. > :48:36.That is all from Newsnight tonight. A storm brewing, but the calm
:48:36. > :48:40.before the storm brewing. It could be an icey start but many of us
:48:40. > :48:42.having a reasonable day with some sunshine inbetween the showers.
:48:42. > :48:46.Quite a mixture through the afternoon for example, there will
:48:46. > :48:50.be band of showers pushing out through parts of the Midlands, some
:48:50. > :48:55.of those showers will be wintry, mostly falling as rain to lower
:48:55. > :49:00.levels, on either side sunshine hanging on. Showers hanging on in
:49:00. > :49:04.the London area. Breezy but the winds not excessively strong, wet
:49:04. > :49:08.and windy across the far South-West of England as we end the day, a
:49:08. > :49:13.sign of things to come. That rain pushing up into the far South-West
:49:13. > :49:16.of Wales. Most of Wales having a reasonable interlude, some sunshine
:49:16. > :49:19.through the afternoon. For Northern Ireland too, I think after a
:49:19. > :49:24.showery period things will tend to dry out for a time in the afternoon.
:49:24. > :49:29.Scotland looks like having a cold, cold day, lingering fog patches,
:49:29. > :49:33.and the services could well have been -- surfaces quite slippery.
:49:33. > :49:37.Wet and windy overnight across the southern half of the UK, that is
:49:37. > :49:41.snow across Wales and the Midlands. That is one to watch. The worst of
:49:41. > :49:46.the conditions gradually clearing away on Friday, left behind a cold