26/01/2012

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:08. > :00:13.The Deputy Prime Minister says the pressure on family finances has

:00:13. > :00:18.reached boiling point, and tax cuts now are the answer.

:00:18. > :00:21.In trying to rebuild the Lib Dem brand, is Nick Clegg tearing up his

:00:21. > :00:26.loyalty card. In terms of Government policy, this

:00:26. > :00:30.is, very definitely, an unexpected item in the bagging I can't

:00:30. > :00:35.remember.Is the coalition cracking -- area. Is the coalition cracking,

:00:35. > :00:43.we debate who is the fairest of them all. The shadow Health

:00:43. > :00:48.Minister quits the committee, Dorries and Diane Abbott here.

:00:49. > :00:54.Why do so many great and possibly not so great Britains turn down

:00:55. > :00:58.honours. I think the whole honours system is pathetic and received by

:00:58. > :01:03.pathetic people, except for my friend, Michael Cain. It all

:01:03. > :01:08.started here, will the next war be fought with keyboards and hard

:01:08. > :01:13.drives, that is what Britain's former spy chief thinks. We have to

:01:13. > :01:22.be super alert, super informed, have the highest level of expertise

:01:22. > :01:28.and make sure we are applying that. Good evening, budgets used to be

:01:28. > :01:32.secretive affairs, even prime ministers and Sunday newspapers

:01:32. > :01:36.were only told of the contents a few days in advance. Those days are

:01:36. > :01:40.long gone. In his speech Nick Clegg set out what amounted to a Lib Dem

:01:40. > :01:46.shopping list, with raising tax flesh holds right at the very top.

:01:46. > :01:52.He said -- thresholds right at the top. He said the Government had to

:01:52. > :01:56.choose whether tax breaks favoured the many or the few. Which begs the

:01:56. > :02:00.question of which sides the coalition partners are on.

:02:00. > :02:04.The Deputy Prime Minister was clearly in the mood to take risks,

:02:04. > :02:08.like bypassing a supermarket checkout with a bottle of water in

:02:08. > :02:13.his hand a chap got six months over the summer for. That no suggestion

:02:13. > :02:16.the water wasn't his, however, he is accused of trying to loop the

:02:16. > :02:20.budget. I don't believe George Osborne signed this off. I think

:02:20. > :02:24.he's trying to bounce the Conservatives. We do want the tax-

:02:24. > :02:29.free slice to go up to �10,000, it is in the coalition agreement,

:02:29. > :02:33.there is a time and place to do it. He has clearly said something to

:02:33. > :02:43.upset, let's rewind and find out. On this visit to a supermarket this

:02:43. > :02:44.

:02:44. > :02:49.morning, Mr Clegg said he wanted a tax break for those on low pay

:02:49. > :02:55.have taken big steps to make sure basic rate tax-payers have money

:02:55. > :02:59.back in their pocket by April, the point at which they pay income tax

:03:00. > :03:04.will be raised. I want it raised further and faster to give more

:03:04. > :03:07.money back into the pockets of millions of working families in

:03:07. > :03:13.this country. The coalition is already committed to making sure

:03:13. > :03:17.nobody pays tax on their first �10,000 of income, by 2015. Now Mr

:03:17. > :03:21.Clegg says he wants to go further and faster. But, like the checkout

:03:21. > :03:25.staff, we are entitled to ask, how would you like to pay for that,

:03:25. > :03:30.Sir? We have to pay for it from the top. Ask people at the top, and

:03:30. > :03:33.there are many, many allowances and loopholes and exemptions at the top

:03:33. > :03:38.that only benefit very wealthy people, to pay a bit more, to pay

:03:38. > :03:42.more of their fair share, and use that money, penny for penny, pound-

:03:42. > :03:46.for-pound, to put money back in the pockets of hard working, hard

:03:46. > :03:50.pressed families in this country. Mr Clegg wants to bring in a

:03:50. > :03:57.mansion tax on homes worth more than �2 million. That is long been

:03:57. > :04:00.a Lib Dem policy. He wants to close unspecified loophole, but including

:04:00. > :04:03.higher rate tax relief on pension contributions. He will struggle to

:04:03. > :04:08.win over Conservative backbenchers. I worked in the Treasury in the

:04:08. > :04:13.1990, I tell you, every Chancellor since then has been told by Civil

:04:13. > :04:17.Service number crunchers we can get X billion by abolishing top rate

:04:17. > :04:21.pension relief. Every Chancellor has said no, for a simple reason,

:04:21. > :04:24.it is toxic. It hits the striving middle-class who want to save and

:04:24. > :04:28.do the right thing. That wouldn't get past Conservative backbenchers

:04:28. > :04:32.in a hurry. Talk to people close to Nick Clegg and ask, has this been

:04:32. > :04:38.cleared with the Treasury and there is a pause. The Treasury, they

:04:38. > :04:43.point out, is no longer a monolit, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury,

:04:43. > :04:48.a Lib Dem thinks it is a wonderful idea. OK, you say, has it been

:04:48. > :04:52.cleared by the Chancellor? It has been shared with him, they say. Is

:04:52. > :04:54.it Government policy, you ask, Government policy, another pause,

:04:55. > :05:03.Government policy, we are still very much learning how this

:05:03. > :05:07.coalition business works. I think we can take that as a no. It is all

:05:07. > :05:11.nonsense, the idea that a tax cut of any size can be funded without

:05:11. > :05:16.actually hurting anyone, or increasing borrowing, which is what

:05:16. > :05:19.Ed Balls wants to do. It is nonsense. In that sense, how much

:05:19. > :05:23.George Osborne thinks it is nice to give people tax cut, it won't make

:05:23. > :05:27.the budget if it can't be funded? This is positioning to put the

:05:27. > :05:30.Liberal Democrats on the right side of the one issue that actually has

:05:30. > :05:35.any cut through or salience, which is they are in favour of a tax cut

:05:35. > :05:41.that favours the lower paid, even if it doesn't. But people like it,

:05:41. > :05:45.and so Nick Clegg is positioning himself to looks a if he's pressing

:05:45. > :05:48.George Osborne to go further and faster in giving tax relief to the

:05:49. > :05:54.lower paid. The debate about tax fairness is

:05:54. > :05:58.never very far away. But the Deputy Prime Minister picked a good day to

:05:59. > :06:03.talk about taxing the rich, because today we heard, Stephen Hester, the

:06:03. > :06:09.CEO of the Royal Bank of Scotland, is to be paid a bonus worth

:06:09. > :06:13.�963,000. If Stephen Hester wants to leave RBS and set up a fantastic

:06:13. > :06:18.business, let's say here in Plymouth, which ends up employing

:06:18. > :06:24.2,000 people, and makes him extremely rich man, great, go a do

:06:24. > :06:29.it. If he's so brilliant, let him go and do. That's working for a

:06:29. > :06:35.company which is five sixths boind the taxpayer, he has to think like

:06:35. > :06:39.a public servant, not one lining his own pocket. There may not be

:06:40. > :06:43.much overlap of a millionaire public sector banker, and your

:06:43. > :06:50.average hard-pressed supermarket shopper, today, though, the deputy

:06:50. > :06:54.fraim Prime Minister came up with a policy he thinks deals with both.

:06:54. > :06:57.Whether in reality it can work, that is another matter. With me now,

:06:57. > :07:02.the Conservative MP, Matthew Hancock, Norman Lamb, the chief

:07:02. > :07:06.political adviser to Nick Clegg, and shadow Treasury minister, Chris

:07:06. > :07:13.Leslie. Matthew Hancock, it is highly irregular la, but you are

:07:13. > :07:18.delighted I'm sure, it -- irregular, but you are delighted I'm sure, it

:07:18. > :07:22.must seem as if this is ready-made? It was there in the coalition. The

:07:22. > :07:26.two parties want to raise the tax threshold and get money into

:07:26. > :07:29.pockets. We are saying it will be up to �10,000 in this budget?

:07:29. > :07:33.is not what Nick Clegg is saying. But the direction of travel is very

:07:33. > :07:41.clear, It is widely supported on the Conservative benches. If it is

:07:41. > :07:45.not going to be by 2015, is it this year, this budget, the next budget?

:07:45. > :07:50.Nick Clegg set a very large bright kite flying today, which indicated

:07:50. > :07:54.to most ordinary people, that, guess what, it could happen in the

:07:54. > :07:58.next budget? Who knows, the budget hasn't been written. Presumably

:07:58. > :08:04.Nick Clegg didn't do this without any consultation? As the film said,

:08:04. > :08:07.it has been shared by the Treasury, with the Treasury. It is

:08:07. > :08:10.about...Did George Osborne say it was OK for Nick Clegg to say this?

:08:10. > :08:14.It is not a question of having to be cleared. Nick Clegg, as Deputy

:08:14. > :08:18.Prime Minister, can say what he wants about Liberal Democrat

:08:18. > :08:21.priorities. This was in the Liberal Democrat manifesto, one of the key

:08:21. > :08:25.priorities at the election. It went into the coalition agreement.

:08:25. > :08:28.was agreed in the coalition, as far as I understand, is it would be

:08:28. > :08:34.implemented by 2015. If that was so, why the urgency n a supermarket

:08:34. > :08:37.this morning? I will tell you why. Here and now families on low and

:08:37. > :08:41.middle incomes are being squeezed. That is what he said, if that is

:08:41. > :08:47.the case, isn't he giving them false hope, if it is not going to

:08:47. > :08:51.happen in this budget, there is no point in telling family it is 2015?

:08:51. > :08:54.We are urging for it to be implemented quicker than previously

:08:54. > :08:58.thought. Because of the challenge ordinary families are suffering now.

:08:58. > :09:03.I know what your reason is. What I'm asking you is how quickly,

:09:03. > :09:06.there is no point in doing it today. Nick Clegg is either desperate for

:09:06. > :09:11.a headline or he's on to something? We want significant movement in

:09:11. > :09:15.this budget. We want to get as much as we can of this raising of the

:09:15. > :09:19.threshold, as quickly as possible. He's trying to bounce him? No, this

:09:19. > :09:21.is a negotiation. Is he trying to bounce him? Let me make this point.

:09:22. > :09:26.It is a setting out of Liberal Democrat priorities. And I will

:09:26. > :09:32.tell you this, it is also creating a real incentive to work for people

:09:32. > :09:37.on low pay, if you cut the tax rate, that they are bearing at the moment.

:09:38. > :09:41.Are you the dog in this hunt, Chris Leslie? It is beginning to dawn on

:09:41. > :09:47.them that some action is needed to help those squeezed at the moment,

:09:47. > :09:51.fine, it is about time they realise they needed to take action. Do you

:09:51. > :09:54.support this. Norman Lamb, the question you are asking is do you

:09:54. > :09:58.support this? The question to you is, when is it going to happen. I

:09:58. > :10:03.presume Chris Leslie does support the idea of raising the threshold

:10:03. > :10:07.to �10,000, but when? Some action is needed whether it is this, we

:10:07. > :10:11.would prefer VAT reduction, temporarily to help people. Nothing

:10:11. > :10:14.was done. Do you support this? There are benefits, but it doesn't

:10:14. > :10:18.help pensioners or all those people unemployed you are putting on the

:10:18. > :10:22.dole. We would have to look at the details of it. It shouldn't have

:10:22. > :10:25.taken the economy going into reverse to wake up Nick Clegg.

:10:25. > :10:29.There is panic here in the Government. This was what was on

:10:29. > :10:34.offer, would you support it? will not vote against a tax change,

:10:34. > :10:38.except for the fact we would prefer the VAT removal. Labour did

:10:38. > :10:42.nothing...You Have a lot of voters who voted for the coalition, who

:10:42. > :10:46.didn't vote for the coalition but have a coalition. This is like a

:10:46. > :10:49.dog's breakfast. It sounds like Nick Clegg goes to the supermarket,

:10:49. > :10:54.thinks better get one over George Osborne on this, make sure I'm

:10:54. > :10:58.ahead of the pack, I might have it signed off, but I will nail it as

:10:58. > :11:03.it is. You are frustrated there is a lot of coalition unity on this,

:11:03. > :11:09.it is palpable. We have a Labour representative over there, when

:11:09. > :11:15.Labour cancelled the 10p tax rate, doubling tax on the low paid.

:11:15. > :11:24.start bringing that in. We both want to help low paid people.

:11:24. > :11:28.you get to the threshold of �10,000, it will cost between �9-�10 billion.

:11:28. > :11:33.Nick Clegg said today, the coalition has to decide where it

:11:33. > :11:36.stands, it is not about helping the wealthy few but the hard working

:11:36. > :11:42.many. These are the signals he's sending out, how will it be paid

:11:42. > :11:47.for? It has to be paid for, it can't be paid for by borrowing. The

:11:47. > :11:53.top 1%, the incomes and wealth of the top 1% have soared away. What

:11:53. > :12:01.about a bankers' tax. He said he was happy with the filthy rich.

:12:01. > :12:04.What about the bankers' bonuses. closing the allowances the wealthy

:12:04. > :12:11.exploit. Is that what you want to do, get the top 1% and make them

:12:11. > :12:15.pay for it? I'm very proud that this Government is putting almost a

:12:15. > :12:19.billion pounds into tackling tax avoidance, and making sure the

:12:19. > :12:23.people at the top pay their fair share. I agree that should be part

:12:23. > :12:30.of it. We have to find the money. We know you have to find the money

:12:30. > :12:38.to do these things. For instance, you can't both support it, as Chris

:12:38. > :12:45.pro-ports to do, and not crack -- purports to do and not crackdown on

:12:45. > :12:53.benefits. Are you going to raise it to �10,000? Ter tackling tax

:12:53. > :12:57.avoidance at the top and tapping benefits at the bottom. Chris

:12:57. > :13:02.Leslie, the VAT cut, is that all you have to offer, the VAT cut?

:13:02. > :13:06.want urgent help now, VAT would be good. This is a synthetic row

:13:06. > :13:13.between two Government members of power. They have increased VAT and

:13:13. > :13:16.cut tax credits. We have to get the the chaos of the last Labour

:13:16. > :13:22.Government. Let's look at fairness, if it was a Labour Government,

:13:22. > :13:26.would Stephen Hester be getting �963,000 bonus? No, I will tell you

:13:26. > :13:30.why, because the share price of RBS has fallen by a third. Their main

:13:30. > :13:34.job was to lend to businesses, I want to hear Matthew Hancock

:13:34. > :13:39.justify the decision of the Prime Minister, by the way, to award �963

:13:39. > :13:44.though though can you justify it? Justify it please? The way this

:13:44. > :13:48.bonus was signed off, was set up by the Labour Party. The board had to

:13:48. > :13:53.sign it off under the system set up by the Labour Party. Are you happy

:13:53. > :13:57.with it? I wish that it was lower. I'm not in favour. Are you happy

:13:57. > :14:01.with the bonus that Stephen Hester was handed? I like most people

:14:01. > :14:04.would feel deeply uncomfortable with a bonus that side. It is a

:14:05. > :14:08.public bank? I don't know the details of the contractural terms.

:14:08. > :14:12.It was clearly established to provide a significant bonus under

:14:12. > :14:16.the last Labour Government. going to have to stop you there, it

:14:16. > :14:20.is right out of time. It may be unfair, but we have to stop.

:14:20. > :14:24.A row over abortion counselling has been rumbling around Westminster

:14:24. > :14:28.since September, when MPs voted against proposals to stop abortion

:14:28. > :14:33.providers offering counselling. But today, the shadow health

:14:33. > :14:36.spokeswoman, Diane Abbott, quit the cross-party committee set up after

:14:36. > :14:42.that vote to set up abortion services, claiming it was a front

:14:42. > :14:48.for driving through the anti-choice lobbyists' preferred option. You

:14:48. > :14:51.have been following this. Why the explosion today? It goes back to

:14:51. > :14:56.Nadine Dorries's amendment originally, she wanted independent

:14:56. > :14:59.advice for women wanting abortions, not from the provider, before an

:14:59. > :15:01.abortion. The question is what is independent advice and does it

:15:01. > :15:06.exist. We investigated that back in August. We looked at the groups

:15:06. > :15:10.considered by the Government. In lots of cases the advice they were

:15:10. > :15:14.giving was anything but impartial. We accessed the training manuals of

:15:14. > :15:18.the biggest provider Care Confidential, and abortion was

:15:18. > :15:21.described as a sin and a wickedness. Will these groups still be

:15:21. > :15:26.considered? At the moment women in England can

:15:26. > :15:34.have an abortion from a clinic, run by charities like BPAS, and Stopes

:15:34. > :15:39.stop. But pro-life groups argue there is -- Marie Stopes. But pro-

:15:39. > :15:42.life groups argue there is a leaning to recommend abortion.

:15:42. > :15:46.Nadine Dorries tried to stop these groups advising pregnant women.

:15:46. > :15:52.They said if women were made to have independent advice first, they

:15:52. > :16:00.could cut the abortion rate by 60,000 a year. But who qualifies to

:16:00. > :16:03.offer truly independent advice? We investigated the UK's biggest

:16:03. > :16:07.independent abortion counsellors, Care Confidential, the group is

:16:07. > :16:17.supposed to offer impartial and non-directive counselling. But

:16:17. > :16:33.

:16:33. > :16:38.Newsnight had access to their After our programme the Nadine

:16:38. > :16:42.Dorries amendment suffered a heavy defeat in the Commons, in a cross-

:16:43. > :16:47.party abortion group was set up. As she walked out today, Diane Abbott

:16:47. > :16:50.hinted at a hidden agenda. She said it was just a front for the old

:16:50. > :16:53.plan. But tonight the public Health Minister, Anne Milton, tried to

:16:53. > :16:56.reassure the public, that the Government would not force women to

:16:56. > :17:02.get called independent counselling. This is only about improving

:17:02. > :17:06.services for women, there is no hidden agenda, and as I say, I'm

:17:06. > :17:10.extremely disappointed at Diane's actions. What we need to do is make

:17:10. > :17:14.sure women have an offer of counselling, if they want to take

:17:14. > :17:18.it up, it won't be mandatory, but it is available. Tonight the issue

:17:18. > :17:24.became mired in war of words, with Diane Abbott calling Nadine Dorries

:17:24. > :17:29.a Tea Party Tory, and her opponent dismissing her as simply bizarre.

:17:29. > :17:33.Here now are Diane Abbott, the shadow Health Minister and MP for

:17:33. > :17:36.Hackney, who quit the cross-party group today, and Nadine Dorries,

:17:36. > :17:41.from mid-Bedfordshire, who is still very much on it. Storming off, I

:17:41. > :17:44.mean really, should you not just have stayed to fight your corner?

:17:44. > :17:50.didn't storm off, I wrote Anne Milton a letter. We have to begin

:17:50. > :17:53.by understanding that women are offered counselling. The Royal

:17:53. > :17:57.College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, the BMA and the

:17:57. > :18:01.Department of Health have elaborate guidelines for counselling. All the

:18:01. > :18:07.clinics are inspected and monitored. But nobody is presumably suggesting

:18:07. > :18:10.at the moment, certainly not Anne Milton, that women are forced into

:18:10. > :18:14.independent counselling. It seemed the tenor of the conversation in

:18:15. > :18:20.the committee wasn't to your liking? We were drawing up a

:18:20. > :18:24.document, the last draft I saw, we were offering three options, the

:18:25. > :18:27.last option was where the clinics wouldn't be allowed to do the

:18:27. > :18:32.counselling. Didn't like the behaviour in the committee, you

:18:32. > :18:35.didn't like Diane Abbott's behaviour? I have no problem with

:18:35. > :18:38.Diane Abbott's behaviour. She didn't write to Anne Milton, she

:18:38. > :18:42.wrote to the press. Anne Milton hadn't received the letter by the

:18:42. > :18:46.time she was contacted by the press. You had an unprecedented

:18:46. > :18:52.opportunity to influence that consultation document, Labour peer,

:18:52. > :18:57.Baroness Gould is on the committee, a well known pro-choiceer,

:18:57. > :19:00.FrankField, Labour is on the committee. There are more pro-

:19:00. > :19:04.choiceers on the committee. There were three meetings, you arrived

:19:04. > :19:09.late for one, and slept through the other. You had no interest

:19:09. > :19:12.whatsoever. You slept through the first one? You know, I think it is

:19:12. > :19:16.really important that we have a rational debate about this. Of

:19:16. > :19:19.course I didn't sleep through a meeting. You did, it has been

:19:19. > :19:24.verified by the members of the committee. If you really want to

:19:24. > :19:28.comment on this committee, should have taken part and attended, you

:19:28. > :19:31.stormed off, thrown your toys out of the pram. This is not about you,

:19:31. > :19:35.it is about women who are vulnerable, no access across the

:19:35. > :19:39.country to any kind of counselling. You have tried to put across the

:19:39. > :19:45.message this is mandatory counselling, it is an offer. There

:19:45. > :19:50.are lots of women, articulate, and well educated, who go straight to

:19:50. > :19:53.the abortion clinic, that is great for them. This consultation

:19:53. > :19:58.document is talking about very vulnerable groups, Diane claims to

:19:58. > :20:01.support and represent, who have no friends, nobody to talk to, and no

:20:01. > :20:05.access to counselling. This is exact lie the debate around

:20:05. > :20:09.abortion we don't want to have. There is a pro-choice consensus in

:20:09. > :20:18.parliament. What people don't want is a very kind of Americanised

:20:18. > :20:23.debate, which sperpblised and sensational, and you know, --

:20:23. > :20:27.Americanised, sensational, you know, Sarah Palin type. I was worried

:20:27. > :20:31.that it was more about a fix for internal problems. According to

:20:31. > :20:34.Nadine Dorries you weren't at the last committee meeting? I was.

:20:34. > :20:40.weren't at the second one, and asleep at the first one.

:20:40. > :20:44.weren't at the third one. If all you could do. You have walked out

:20:44. > :20:48.of the committee you didn't attend. Nadine is seeking to personalise an

:20:48. > :20:54.issue which is actually really important to hundreds and thousands

:20:54. > :20:57.of women. In which case, why not stay in the committee and have the

:20:57. > :21:00.discussion? Far from the people on the committee being pro-choice,

:21:00. > :21:06.they were not. I worry we still have Nadine's option on the table

:21:06. > :21:11.and the consultation is a front for putting it through. Let's ask you

:21:11. > :21:15.about it being a front. This is a consultation document, which is

:21:15. > :21:20.being decide by a cross-party group of MPs, two other Labour MPs have

:21:20. > :21:24.sat on that committee and have contributed to every meeting very

:21:24. > :21:30.positively, both pro-choice. Baroness Gould, on the Marches in

:21:30. > :21:34.the 1960s for pro-choice. Both ardent pro-choice MPs. They have

:21:34. > :21:41.put into the consultation document. It is up to us, it is a public

:21:41. > :21:47.consultation document, it is going to the public. Three options, two

:21:47. > :21:52.keep it as it is now, and the other two about offering counselling at

:21:52. > :21:55.various stages. The British pregnancy advisory service, and

:21:55. > :22:00.Marie Stopes offer advice about abortions, do you want them to

:22:00. > :22:07.continue? I would like anybody who has a financial or any kind of

:22:07. > :22:11.interest in a woman's abortion, to declare that interest. They take

:22:11. > :22:14.�130 million of Government money. Do you want independent counsellors

:22:15. > :22:18.to declare whether they are against abortion or not? Yes. You want to

:22:18. > :22:22.be clear, the Government will not go for any mandatory decision on,

:22:22. > :22:27.that that is what Anne Milton said, you accept that? Absolutely. There

:22:27. > :22:31.is nobody who should be in a room with a woman, who is in a crisis

:22:31. > :22:38.pregnancy, who has any agenda whatsoever, religious or financial.

:22:38. > :22:41.You are suggesting that Marie Stopes has an agenda? I'm not

:22:41. > :22:44.suggesting that. I'm saying there are lots of women in this country,

:22:44. > :22:48.in crisis pregnancy, who would like an offer of somebody to talk to.

:22:48. > :22:51.Can I just say, one of the reasons why this document has been

:22:51. > :22:55.developed, is the Department of Health has done a lot of research,

:22:55. > :22:59.they have discovered that in some parts of the country women do get

:22:59. > :23:02.offered counselling from Marie Stopes and B pass or whatever, in

:23:02. > :23:12.other parts of the country the situation is dire. It is a postcode

:23:12. > :23:15.lottery. This is a political fix with this consultation, this was

:23:15. > :23:18.voted down in the House of Commons. I would also say that far from me

:23:18. > :23:21.not understanding what is going on in the committee, there are other

:23:21. > :23:25.members of the committee who are as concerned as I am about the way it

:23:25. > :23:29.is going. Like who? It is not for me to say. Other people are

:23:29. > :23:33.considering their petition. Women's lives are too important to be

:23:33. > :23:36.pieces on a political chess board. Thank you very much.

:23:36. > :23:42.A trip to Windsor Castle, Buckingham Palace, or hole road

:23:42. > :23:46.castle, to see the Queen, and be honoured for our contribution to

:23:46. > :23:50.British life. Who could want anything else. According to a list

:23:50. > :23:56.released today, after a freedom of information request, quite a lot of

:23:56. > :24:01.prominent people have turned it down, CS Lewis, Roald Dahl, and

:24:01. > :24:11.even those who have painted portraits of the Queen. We have

:24:11. > :24:12.

:24:12. > :24:18.tried to find out why. What would you say to ag ong? It was no thanks

:24:18. > :24:25.from this long line. The author, JB Priestly, he declined a Knighthood,

:24:25. > :24:32.as did Henry Morre. Francis Bacon said no to a decoration, so do

:24:32. > :24:39.Lewisian Freud, who died last year. And LS Lowry, who spuorned titles a

:24:39. > :24:45.record five times -- spuorned titles a record five times. A

:24:45. > :24:50.painter of industrial landscaped, he immortalised Salford, once a

:24:50. > :24:54.poor area of Manchester, putting up with a big part of the BBC now. A

:24:54. > :25:02.former student of Lowry, remembers discussion the honours list with

:25:02. > :25:06.the big man. He said what do you think of the system? I said I think

:25:06. > :25:09.it has its purposes and a lot of people are elevated by it. He said

:25:09. > :25:14.as far as that elevation was concerned he won't be going up in

:25:14. > :25:22.the list. He felt there was possibly, at times, a political

:25:22. > :25:25.entity with it. He was not comfortable with it. It was simply

:25:25. > :25:29.the fact he didn't wish to have something that would change his

:25:29. > :25:36.name to the general public. Giants of British cinema have shrugged off

:25:36. > :25:43.a royal tap on the shoulder. Including Trevor Howard, Alfred

:25:43. > :25:47.Hitchcock, Michael Winner. Michael winner? It's true, the director --

:25:47. > :25:52.Michael Winner? It's true, he turned down the OBE, as he

:25:52. > :25:57.confirmed it when he granted Newsnight an interview at his

:25:57. > :26:05.official London residence, or the ver Rwanda. I said this is the

:26:05. > :26:09.award they give to people who clean toilets, it was taken wrongly and

:26:09. > :26:14.taken as a ci.. The only thing I would have accepted it was a Lord

:26:14. > :26:18.sh. Then you can put on silly clothing and speak to a load of

:26:18. > :26:23.people who are half dead. And what you say might be carried by the

:26:23. > :26:28.media to a wider audience, rather than 20 people asleep in the House

:26:28. > :26:32.of Lords. It is not like that at all, many of the peers are wide

:26:32. > :26:35.awake. Many think hats off to the likes of Lord Mandelson, happy to

:26:36. > :26:41.accept a title, it is better than turning one down, says a Brit

:26:41. > :26:46.decorated by the French. I love the English honours system, it is a

:26:46. > :26:54.fabulous demonstration of our national genius, for snobbery. I

:26:54. > :27:00.have adored today's stories about the fabulous arabesque post turgs

:27:00. > :27:06.of the self-important people. -- posturings of the self-important

:27:06. > :27:09.people. It is an Hon nor to accept it rather an reject it. Snobbery

:27:09. > :27:13.will be involved in one way or another in accepting or rejecting.

:27:13. > :27:17.There is an individual choice. There are some who will wish to

:27:17. > :27:21.make a political statement, or highlight some issue they are

:27:21. > :27:29.particularly interested in their life. This is perhaps an

:27:29. > :27:39.opportunity both in accepting or in rejecting.

:27:39. > :27:40.

:27:40. > :27:47.One of the surprising names among the refusals is that of Hu g hie

:27:47. > :27:52.Green. Can you imagine Simon Cowell declining a gong, why did Green say

:27:53. > :28:01.no, perhaps, he like other showbiz legends, were holding out for

:28:01. > :28:09.something better. What would your style be, Lord winner of -- Lord

:28:09. > :28:15.Winner of Winnerville! Yes. I am joined by my guest who was awarded

:28:15. > :28:19.a Knighthood for services to art and education, and my guest who has

:28:19. > :28:24.turned down an MBE for services to writing.

:28:24. > :28:28.Journalists should never ask a "how do you feel" question, but I will

:28:29. > :28:35.ask it, how did you feel when the sword came down on your shoulder?

:28:35. > :28:42.It is liker roll flin on the deck and the sun glinting on the sword.

:28:42. > :28:45.It is wonderful thing. Do you like being called Sir Christopher?

:28:45. > :28:48.like the arts getting a pat on the back. People say it is for the

:28:48. > :28:52.great and the good and the privileges and the wealthy. The

:28:52. > :29:02.arts don't get much of a pat on the back from establishment, and art

:29:02. > :29:03.

:29:03. > :29:09.institutions, it is jolly nice when it happens. What is wrong with it.

:29:09. > :29:19.Do you have to have a coat of arms? You don't have to. You have chosen

:29:19. > :29:20.

:29:20. > :29:28.it? I got some of the students to help me. Nobody has ever put a dodo

:29:28. > :29:35.on the top, because it is exstibgt. You have to have a motto, it

:29:36. > :29:39.translates to "go ahead punk, make my day". Sir Christopher gets a lot

:29:39. > :29:43.out of it? A lot of people are offered them and it is not clear

:29:43. > :29:49.why. It is a really snobbish system. It is interesting that people

:29:49. > :29:54.accuse you of snobbery if you reject them. Actually there are all

:29:54. > :29:58.these grades. When you get a letter, which says the Foreign Secretary is

:29:58. > :30:00.minded to recommend to the imaginationry that you be admitted

:30:01. > :30:04.to the honourary Order of the British empire. Will you be a

:30:05. > :30:08.member, officer, commander. Well there are people who actually want

:30:08. > :30:11.nothing more in their lives than to be a chander of the British Empire,

:30:11. > :30:15.I'm not in that group -- commander of the British Empire, I'm not in

:30:15. > :30:18.that group of people. Do you take the point that turning it down you

:30:19. > :30:21.are more snobbish than accepting it? That is a cheap point and easy

:30:21. > :30:25.to make. One of the reasons I turned it down was when I wrote

:30:25. > :30:29.back I said thank you very much, it is very nice of you to offer this,

:30:29. > :30:39.but why can't we have an honest system which is inclusive and

:30:39. > :30:40.

:30:40. > :30:43.modern. Why do we have to have all the gradeations. Christopher

:30:43. > :30:47.accepted it because it was art being recognised, your work on

:30:47. > :30:52.human rights was being recognised. All your colleagues would get the

:30:52. > :30:59.reflected glory as well? People always say I'm not accepted it for

:30:59. > :31:04.me but my mother. I accepted it for me and the institution. In art he

:31:04. > :31:09.had gaigs it is extremely rare for somebody to -- education it is

:31:09. > :31:13.extremely rare for somebody to get it. Art education comes in through

:31:13. > :31:18.the tradesmans' entrance, and now it was in the palace. You talk

:31:18. > :31:23.about it in British terms, tradesmans' entrance and now the

:31:23. > :31:28.palace door. Is it a very British thing, even the language as was

:31:28. > :31:34.said about how the letter comes out? Nine British traditions out of

:31:34. > :31:37.ten date from Victorian times. All this goes back to the Normans, all

:31:37. > :31:40.the gradations. The thing that is wrong with some of the gradations,

:31:40. > :31:44.it relates to the controversy about the bank at the moment, is some of

:31:44. > :31:48.them, you do a roll and by virtue of doing that role, you expect to

:31:48. > :31:56.get an honour. I think it should be related to doing it well, rather

:31:56. > :32:00.than just inhabiting it. Stephen Baley has the French awards, do

:32:00. > :32:09.others have the same problem with awards that we have? I'm not

:32:09. > :32:16.against awards, per se, I'm against the things that go with it. After I

:32:16. > :32:22.was awarded an MBE for human rights, somebody I like who makes shoes,

:32:22. > :32:29.and I have several payers of their shoes, but they got an OBE for

:32:29. > :32:34.services to fashion, why is fashion on a higher rung than human rights.

:32:34. > :32:40.Dame Joan would have been OK for human rights? Not at all. A friend

:32:40. > :32:45.was broken hearted because he wasn't awarded a certain honour.

:32:45. > :32:49.Look at the swathe of those who have turned it down and now dead,

:32:49. > :32:53.up until 1999, an awful lot in the arts community thinking it is not

:32:53. > :32:56.for them? The romantic view of the artist, outsider status, it is bad

:32:57. > :33:03.for your image as an artist to get into bed with the establishment.

:33:03. > :33:10.That goes back to the early 1th century, that is why Lucian Freud,

:33:10. > :33:13.Lowry, Piper, surprisingly, are all on the list. I don't think it is

:33:13. > :33:16.right, the reason why so many people in the arts have turned it

:33:16. > :33:19.down is they have a strong sense of identity of who they are, they

:33:19. > :33:26.don't need the recognition. The arts is rather democratic and

:33:26. > :33:29.modern part of society. So it is you that is out of step in the

:33:29. > :33:34.community? Some do some do tell that to others, it is a personal

:33:34. > :33:38.choice in the end. We will have to finish it there, maybe something

:33:38. > :33:42.will drop through the mat for one of our audience next time.

:33:42. > :33:46.Albert Einstein said he didn't know which weapons would fight the third

:33:46. > :33:50.world war, but the fourth would be fought with sticks and stones. At a

:33:50. > :33:54.cybersecurity conference today, they think they do know, wars will

:33:54. > :33:58.be fought in signer space with armies of hackers on each side.

:33:58. > :34:07.Computer worms and cyberattacks we have been getting used to, we don't

:34:07. > :34:16.know exactly by whom. Earlier I asked the American signer defence

:34:16. > :34:20.people who their role is. There is a silent battle on,

:34:20. > :34:26.powerful forces on either side, from on-line activists to organised

:34:26. > :34:30.crime to nation states. Cyberspace is the new frontline.

:34:30. > :34:33.All around the world, cyberattacks are hitting the headlines.

:34:33. > :34:41.Authorities in Australia have warned of a flood of attacks

:34:41. > :34:44.against the websites of financial firms. This is a strategic issue.

:34:44. > :34:52.Stop management have just got to be aware of the damage that can be

:34:52. > :34:58.done. On New Year's Day, a multimillion pound cyberheist hits

:34:58. > :35:03.hit banks in South Africa. cyber-heist hit banks in South

:35:03. > :35:08.Africa. Nobody is doing the analysis to the level they need to.

:35:08. > :35:12.Attacks claimed by anonymous cybergroups have hit Governments

:35:12. > :35:15.and corporate business in protest over attempts to police the

:35:15. > :35:19.Internet. Despite the best efforts of big business, international

:35:19. > :35:29.intelligence and the law, the cyber-threat seems to be always one

:35:29. > :35:33.step ahead. This is where it all began,

:35:33. > :35:41.Bletchley Park, just north of London, home to Britain's famous

:35:41. > :35:48.war time code breaking success. This is the world's first modern

:35:48. > :35:54.computer, kollos sis, it was rebuilt -- Collosas, it was rebuilt

:35:54. > :35:57.here at Bletchley Park, this is cyber-warfare at its inception. The

:35:57. > :36:02.whole Bletchley project was kept secret for decades, remote from the

:36:02. > :36:05.outside world. These days our lives depend on digital communications,

:36:05. > :36:13.connecting us with the outside world, but leaving us vulnerable

:36:13. > :36:18.too. Bletchley Park is at the very

:36:18. > :36:25.centre of this whole issue. In the Second World War this, to put it

:36:25. > :36:33.mildly, was a state matter. Now, of course, it is into

:36:33. > :36:40.everything, everybody is affected by it. Sir John Scarlett, now chair

:36:40. > :36:44.of the Bletchley Park Trust, and former head of MI6, has seen cyber-

:36:44. > :36:53.crime increase. We have to worry about crime, terrorism, and state

:36:53. > :36:58.activity, I have course, you have to worry about what is called a

:36:58. > :37:02.hacktivist. I do repeat the state- to-state issue and the threat that

:37:02. > :37:12.comes from the most capable states in this area, it remains a huge

:37:12. > :37:12.

:37:12. > :37:16.issue. As cyberattacks go, the one

:37:16. > :37:21.discovered in 2010 is arguably the most spectacular.

:37:21. > :37:24.It is thought the US and Israel were behind the attack, targeting

:37:24. > :37:29.Iran's nuclear programme by its systems.

:37:29. > :37:33.This is a cyber-security analyst, who has been unpicking the

:37:33. > :37:39.technology. He worries that technology is now out in the open.

:37:39. > :37:43.The problem with it itself, whoever the actors were, they opened

:37:43. > :37:50.Pandora's box, what they did was they allowed the world and the

:37:50. > :37:57.community, the hacking community, and others, to peer into a world of

:37:57. > :38:03.developing cyber-weapons. So when they compromised the see minute

:38:03. > :38:08.architecture, deployed in the -- seemen architecture deployed in the

:38:08. > :38:14.U kits. If someone could reverse engineer, and they have already

:38:14. > :38:18.reverse engine neared some of it, they could reweaponise it to go out

:38:18. > :38:23.there. Old battles are being fought in the new territory. Arab-Israeli

:38:23. > :38:28.tensions are being played out in cyber-space. There is a month-long

:38:28. > :38:34.offensive between pro-Palestinian, and pro-Israeli hackers.

:38:34. > :38:39.In a series of escalating tit for tat attacks, Israeli hackers

:38:39. > :38:43.published the credit card details of hundreds of Saudis, targeted the

:38:43. > :38:48.Saudi Government's stock exchange and released details of the

:38:48. > :38:52.Facebook accounts of 20,000 Arab users. For their part, Saudi teams

:38:52. > :38:55.launched attacks on the Tel Aviv stock exchange, and Israel's

:38:56. > :39:01.national airline. Israel's deputy Foreign Minister compared the

:39:01. > :39:05.signer-attacks to acts of terrorism. When we - cyberattacks, to acts of

:39:05. > :39:09.terrorism. When we spoke to Israeli former head of security, he

:39:09. > :39:12.resisted that parallel. These attacks are nothing new, they are

:39:12. > :39:17.not interesting technically or lodge gistically, and stragically

:39:17. > :39:20.they are even boring, what makes them so important is the way we

:39:20. > :39:25.responded to them wrecks meaning the people, the press and the

:39:25. > :39:29.politician -- them, we meaning the people, the press and the

:39:29. > :39:35.politicians, giving them more strength of character than they

:39:35. > :39:39.actually had. Recent attacks, such as the Israeli-Saudi hacks, have

:39:39. > :39:44.affected civilian targets, banks, airlines and credit card companies.

:39:44. > :39:48.So far it is the military that is taking the lead on cyber-defence.

:39:48. > :39:52.This London conference brings together military experts in cyber-

:39:52. > :39:58.security. But there are clearly tensions. Both the Chinese and

:39:58. > :40:07.Russian delegations accepted invitations to attend, but either

:40:07. > :40:14.are here. In the US, the tone over the cyber-domain is shifting. The

:40:14. > :40:17.US military is recruiting 10,000 cyber-warriors to patrol cyberspace.

:40:17. > :40:23.But should nations be thinking about a different kind of presence

:40:23. > :40:26.in the virtual world. We have seen cyber-incidents between Russia and

:40:27. > :40:30.Georgia, that is still on going. We have seen incidents between

:40:30. > :40:36.Pakistan and India, and that is still on going. The United Nations

:40:36. > :40:42.needs to figure out how they can deploy peacekeepers in the digital

:40:42. > :40:46.borders of a nation. The problem with cyberspace is

:40:46. > :40:51.traditional borders no longer exist. The commercial world can protect

:40:51. > :40:56.its interests with systems from companies like Sofos.

:40:56. > :41:00.The challenge for the world of business is keeping pace with

:41:00. > :41:04.cyberattacks. The sheer volume of those attacks, their fast-changing

:41:04. > :41:09.nature, and where they are coming from.

:41:09. > :41:15.We received a Spam message just outside Oxford. The Spam message

:41:15. > :41:19.was actually sent from an infected compromised machine, just outside

:41:19. > :41:26.Warsaw in Poland. When you clicked on the website, in the Spam message,

:41:26. > :41:31.it took you to a location just outside New York. It then

:41:31. > :41:35.redirected you to another location just outside Beijing in China, that

:41:35. > :41:40.used a vulnerability in your browser to install a banking Trojan

:41:40. > :41:45.that was hosted in Russia. Then when you entered your bank account

:41:45. > :41:50.details, next time you logged on to your on-line banking, it collected

:41:50. > :41:54.those details and send it to the bad guy sat on the -- sent it to

:41:54. > :41:59.the bad guy sat on the beach in Brazil. Some people say we need to

:41:59. > :42:02.make it easier for companies hit by cyber-attacks to talk about what

:42:02. > :42:09.went wrong so others can learn. At the moment there is a tendency to

:42:09. > :42:16.close up. You can't go back into your cook Koon and say we can't do

:42:16. > :42:20.that, it brings too many threats it is impossible. Our whole future

:42:20. > :42:26.prosperity depends on us being an open economy. At the same time we

:42:26. > :42:36.have to be super-alert, super- informed, and have the highest

:42:36. > :42:40.

:42:40. > :42:45.possible level of expertise. How the authorities respond to these

:42:45. > :42:50.new forms of attack, will shape all our furtherures.

:42:50. > :42:54.Earlier today I -- futures. Earl they are today I spoke to the head

:42:54. > :42:59.of the cyberco-ordinator at the conference. I began by asking what

:42:59. > :43:04.the US Government was doing about the threat of cyberattacks.

:43:04. > :43:08.matter what the threat, whether a criminal group a nation state or a

:43:08. > :43:12.terrorist, we haven't seen that threat yet. No matter who the

:43:12. > :43:16.threat actor is, having strong defences in place will protect you

:43:16. > :43:18.from that threat. Building a couple of things, which we have

:43:18. > :43:22.increasingly seen done, building the technical defences in countries,

:43:22. > :43:25.this is every country around the world should do this domestically,

:43:25. > :43:30.having institutions in place to have better governance in the

:43:30. > :43:33.country over the issue. For instance, in the US we have a much

:43:33. > :43:37.better US Governmental structure where we are all involved in

:43:37. > :43:41.talking about these issues. Having those strategic documents to think

:43:41. > :43:45.and talk about it is important. The US that is in the political

:43:45. > :43:48.military area, the law of conflict applies to cyberspace. How that

:43:48. > :43:54.applies is something we needing to forward on. It is significant to

:43:54. > :43:58.say there is principles of distinctions and proportionality

:43:58. > :44:03.apply. It is largely believed the Americans were involved in some way

:44:03. > :44:09.in the Stuxnet virus that hit Iran's nuke clier programme, were

:44:09. > :44:12.they involved? I had no knowledge of that at all. What I would say

:44:12. > :44:17.about that, is it simply illustrates how vulnerable systems

:44:17. > :44:21.can be, and how we need to build defences. Have the US, as far as

:44:21. > :44:27.you know, been involved in cyberactivities at military level,

:44:27. > :44:30.up until now? Again I would defer to what the Department of Defence

:44:30. > :44:36.might say, and what they have said in the documents you mentioned. As

:44:36. > :44:39.far as we are saying in a strategic matter, we need to make sure we

:44:40. > :44:43.have the full range of tools to respond. At the same time we have

:44:43. > :44:46.to make sure we are looking at it as a whole Government approach.

:44:46. > :44:51.Russians have been saying they have been trying to get rules of

:44:51. > :44:55.engagment and a treaty, and the US has been resisting? They are right,

:44:55. > :45:00.what they have been proposing, a cyberarms control treaty. There are

:45:00. > :45:04.a couple of different things to think about. One is a cyber-arms

:45:04. > :45:09.control treaty, it doesn't make sense. The reasons it doesn't is

:45:09. > :45:12.the tools we are talking about can be used for offence and defence,

:45:12. > :45:16.again, if that is not the right approach, and we fundamentally

:45:16. > :45:20.don't think it is, we think it is not really looking at the impacts

:45:20. > :45:25.and how nations can deal with each other, then you have to pursue the

:45:25. > :45:31.idea about the norms and rules of the war should be, rather than the

:45:31. > :45:34.artificial treaty concept. All laws can be final well, and well

:45:34. > :45:39.constructed, what about the kids in the bedroom who don't realise what

:45:39. > :45:43.they are getting caught up in? of it is education and part of it

:45:43. > :45:48.is changing the culture, so people in all society understand there is

:45:48. > :45:52.a cost here. This is criminal conduct what you are doing in the

:45:52. > :45:54.bedroom. It is making them more aware of how vulnerable their

:45:55. > :45:58.information is so they take better measures to secure that information.

:45:58. > :46:01.The public is part of. That it is raising that level of awareness,

:46:01. > :46:11.you have to make it part of the common understanding and common

:46:11. > :46:32.

:46:32. > :46:42.dialogue in society. That's it tonight, Gavin will be

:46:42. > :47:08.

:47:08. > :47:12.back tomorrow night, who knows what Showers continue through the night,

:47:12. > :47:15.across western areas. An ice risk as well. Showers prevalent across

:47:15. > :47:21.Scotland and Northern Ireland, working into northern England. Rain,

:47:21. > :47:24.sleet, hail and snow. A dusting across the Pennines and the peak

:47:24. > :47:29.district, from the north, things turning dryer and brighter before

:47:29. > :47:33.the afternoon is kpwhrotly gone. Much of -- completely gone. East

:47:33. > :47:37.Anglia and the south will stay predominantly dry, showers towards

:47:38. > :47:42.the coast. Showers developing late in the day and through the evening,

:47:42. > :47:47.across the south west a mixture of hail, sleet and snow. Nothing too

:47:47. > :47:52.significant with snow concerned. A dusting across the higher grounds

:47:52. > :47:55.of Wales, showers developing widely the second part of the day. An icey

:47:55. > :47:58.cold wind for many, throughout Northern Ireland, clearing some of

:47:58. > :48:02.the morning showers. For Scotland winds will be lighter. Most will

:48:02. > :48:06.have a dry, bright, crisp afternoon, with sunny spells. The same will be

:48:06. > :48:10.said as we go into Saturday, we start to lose the shower risk from

:48:10. > :48:14.many areas, clearer skies developing. It will be an icey

:48:14. > :48:19.start, same too in southern parts. Temperatures continuing to drop.

:48:19. > :48:22.Winds light, and sunshine developing, an icey start, later in

:48:22. > :48:26.the day the cloud will gather from the west. Particularly in Northern