02/02/2012

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:10. > :00:15.Tonight, what's the answer to this? Which minister or ministers signed

:00:15. > :00:20.off this tax avoidance scheme, and on what date? Will he say which

:00:20. > :00:23.minister or ministers signed off the tax arrangements on this deal?

:00:23. > :00:27.Newsnight answers the question the Chief Secretary to the Treasury

:00:27. > :00:31.could not. Which ministers signed off the deal that let a senior

:00:31. > :00:37.public servant avoid paying thousands of pounds a year in tax.

:00:37. > :00:41.11 hours after the revelations on this programme, the Government

:00:41. > :00:45.announces the student loans chief's current tax arrangements will stop

:00:45. > :00:48.immediately. Is the whole tax avoidance scheme

:00:48. > :00:52.one to be gotten rid of. We will debate.

:00:52. > :00:56.In Egypt protestors are met with teargas, as the 74 dead from

:00:56. > :01:02.yesterday's football riot are mourned. Is the state doing

:01:02. > :01:06.anything to avoid the bloodshed. player spoke to me and said you

:01:06. > :01:10.can't imagine what it was like, a fan died in my arms in the dressing

:01:10. > :01:13.room. Both sets of players think this has nothing to do with

:01:13. > :01:17.football, but somebody is trying to cause some sort of unrest in the

:01:17. > :01:21.country. Should the Church of England bless

:01:21. > :01:26.same-sex partnerships, the church says it doesn't really know, how is

:01:26. > :01:29.that for decisive. We will ask Giles Fraser, who resigned from his

:01:29. > :01:34.post last year, whether the church should bend to the political

:01:35. > :01:38.fashions of the day. Rembering Lucian Freud, an the evening of a

:01:38. > :01:42.major retrospective of his paintings, he speak to his daughter,

:01:42. > :01:45.Esther. He accepted him exactly how he was. He was a very interesting

:01:45. > :01:55.and exciting father to have. I could see he was obviously

:01:55. > :01:57.

:01:57. > :02:00.different from other people's fathers, but I always felt lucky.

:02:00. > :02:03.Good evening, revelations by this programme last night that the chief

:02:03. > :02:07.executive of the Student Loans Company was avoiding paying tens of

:02:07. > :02:11.thousands of pounds in tax, in an arrangement signed off by senior

:02:11. > :02:14.ministers, has led to a dramatic re-think by the Government. The

:02:14. > :02:17.Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Danny Alexander, told MPs in

:02:18. > :02:21.response to an urgent parliamentary question, that Ed Lester's tax

:02:21. > :02:24.would now be deducted at source, and he's ordered all other

:02:24. > :02:29.Government departments to do the same to any full-time employee

:02:29. > :02:32.operating under the same sort of scheme. Tonight Newsnight has seen

:02:33. > :02:36.the letter that universities' minister, David Willetts, wrote to

:02:36. > :02:41.the student loans chairman, in which he states the tax arrangement

:02:41. > :02:47.had been accepted at the very top of Government.

:02:47. > :02:50.The eye of the storm, in September 20089, computer failure at the

:02:50. > :02:54.Student Loans Company left tens of thousands without funds.

:02:54. > :02:59.One year on, the coalition and its universities minister, David

:02:59. > :03:03.Willetts, arrive to revel in the appointment of the loans company's

:03:03. > :03:09.new boss. His man, Ed Lester, in the red tie, would ensure meltdown

:03:09. > :03:12.was never repeated. It wasn't. But trouble comes in many guises,

:03:12. > :03:15.what wasn't revealed until last night, was how Mr Lester's pay

:03:15. > :03:21.would be channelled into the private company he runs from his

:03:21. > :03:25.home on the Thames. It's tax efficient, tax avoidant,

:03:25. > :03:32.and it has landed the Government in a world of trouble. So who is to

:03:32. > :03:38.blame? Or in the words of Dennis Skinner: Which minister will carry

:03:38. > :03:42.the can for this mess? I'm here answering questions about it.

:03:42. > :03:46.Alexander, the strerb secretary, was facing the music -- Treasury

:03:46. > :03:52.secretary, was facing the music. He announced that Mr Lester would now

:03:52. > :03:57.pay tax at source, and there will be a review across all the

:03:58. > :04:02.departments over who was using tax avoidance schemes and why. He

:04:02. > :04:06.refused to explain how the Government had approved Mr Lester's

:04:06. > :04:10.tax scheme. We know the higher Education Minister signed this deal

:04:10. > :04:13.off. Will the Chief Secretary for the Treasury acknowledge corporate

:04:13. > :04:17.responsibility across Government that this was signed off by

:04:17. > :04:21.Government for all his protestations now. Which minister

:04:22. > :04:27.or ministers signed off this tax avoidance scheme, and on what date?

:04:27. > :04:30.Will he say which minister or ministers signed off the tax

:04:30. > :04:33.arrangement ones this deal? What I can tell the honourable gentleman

:04:33. > :04:37.is what I said already, I signed off the salary level in this case,

:04:37. > :04:41.the terms and conditions, the terms and conditions of the

:04:41. > :04:45.appointment...But Still no word on tax.

:04:45. > :04:49.So which minister did approve Ed Lester's tax avoidance arrangements,

:04:49. > :04:54.perhaps Newsnight can help answer the question Danny Alexander found

:04:55. > :04:58.so hard. On December 15th, 2010, the Student Loans Company wrote a

:04:58. > :05:04.letter to the universities' minister, David Willetts. It asked

:05:04. > :05:14.his approval to give Ed Lester a contract on pay of �182,000 a year.

:05:14. > :05:18.

:05:18. > :05:22.That current concession was the arrangement allowing Mr Lester's

:05:22. > :05:32.pay to go direct without deductions at source, to his own private

:05:32. > :05:40.

:05:40. > :05:44.company. The following week Mr That's Danny Alexander.

:05:44. > :05:49.We took the course pond dent back to Westminster tomorrow --

:05:49. > :05:55.correspondence back to Westminster today, and showed it to the Labour

:05:55. > :05:58.minister, Meg Hillier. It says it is agreed by the Chief Secretary to

:05:58. > :06:02.the Treasury, which given what he said today that is interesting, and

:06:02. > :06:04.signed off by David Willetts. It is clear what the answer is. I'm

:06:04. > :06:07.amazed, though repeatedly asked in the House today, the Chief

:06:07. > :06:10.Secretary to the Treasury didn't answer who was responsible.

:06:10. > :06:14.does bear responsibility, looking at this? Clearly David Willetts

:06:14. > :06:18.does. But from looking at this, we need to ask more questions from the

:06:18. > :06:21.Chief Secretary to the Treasury, it says in the letter from David

:06:21. > :06:24.Willetts that Danny Alexander has signed this off. I have been a

:06:24. > :06:27.minister, you don't just get a letter like this in your red box,

:06:27. > :06:30.you get a full attachment from the Civil Service explaining all the

:06:30. > :06:33.background. I would be surprised if the Chief Secretary to the Treasury

:06:33. > :06:36.didn't see that background too. He should have asked questions when he

:06:36. > :06:39.saw this letter. While the Treasury is still insisting tonight that

:06:39. > :06:43.Danny Alexander was told nothing about tax, David Willetts'

:06:43. > :06:49.department says the terms and the conditions of Mr Lester were

:06:49. > :06:53.approved across Government. In the past 24 hours, Newsnight's

:06:53. > :06:57.been inundated with calls and e- mails from all over the country,

:06:57. > :07:01.saying -- of people saying they have personal knowledge of highly-

:07:01. > :07:04.paid individuals in the public and private sector, on similar tax

:07:04. > :07:09.efficient arrangements. Chief concern in the public sector is

:07:09. > :07:13.expressed over the NHS and local Government.

:07:13. > :07:17.So like most of the rest of the country's work force, the head of

:07:17. > :07:21.the Student Loans Company, will find his next pay slip is net, not

:07:21. > :07:25.gross. Meanwhile, a Government which told the nation we are all in

:07:25. > :07:32.this together, has yet to confirm who was in the know about Mr

:07:32. > :07:35.Lester's deal. Despite a second day of asking the

:07:35. > :07:38.Government they still don't wish to be interviewed on the issue. We're

:07:38. > :07:41.joined by Margaret Hodge, chair of the Public Accounts Committee.

:07:41. > :07:47.Thanks for coming in. Danny Alexander said he wasn't aware of

:07:47. > :07:53.any tax benefit, does that make sense to you? No, not at all.

:07:53. > :08:03.Because it does appear, from the course pond dense, and I saw the

:08:03. > :08:06.

:08:06. > :08:09.course pond dense that -- From the letters that it was signed off by-

:08:09. > :08:13.election Election. I have been a minister too, you would get a lot

:08:13. > :08:17.of details before signing off an arrangement of that sort.

:08:17. > :08:22.What he said was the salary level was what he concerned himself with,

:08:22. > :08:26.and the terms of conditions, whatever that means, he didn't talk

:08:26. > :08:30.specifically about the tax? It is very difficult to know precisely

:08:30. > :08:33.what Danny Alexander did know. That is why my committee will start an

:08:33. > :08:39.inquiry into this, we are particularly interested as to

:08:39. > :08:44.whether or not the scheme that provided a tax avoidance scheme for

:08:44. > :08:46.this particularly high- paid public servant exists elsewhere in

:08:46. > :08:51.Government. You can understand someone on a consultancy basis,

:08:51. > :08:55.doing it for a short-term, or covers if someone's sick, or on

:08:55. > :09:00.maternity leave, those situations. You can understand that those sort

:09:00. > :09:05.of consultants might have their pay, through a company of a sort. But

:09:05. > :09:09.for a public servant, running a major public body, working full-

:09:09. > :09:12.time, I really do think, I have been saying it all day, I really do

:09:13. > :09:16.think it is hugely important that the Government should lead by

:09:16. > :09:20.example. Can I just say something to you, Danny Alexander said in the

:09:20. > :09:25.House today, that he was going to stop all schemes. I have managed to

:09:25. > :09:30.get hold of a letter that he sent round all the top civil servants to

:09:30. > :09:37.ask if they can give information as to who is being paid on the basis

:09:37. > :09:40.of a tax avoidance scheme. What this letter actually says is,

:09:40. > :09:46."artificial tax avoidance should always be regarded as a novel and

:09:46. > :09:51.contentious use of public resources, so if a public sector organisation

:09:51. > :09:58.is considering a proposal, using tax avoidance, it should consult

:09:58. > :10:02.its usual Treasury contacts, and HMRC, before going ahead ". That

:10:02. > :10:05.doesn't sound to me as if he's ensuring there are no further

:10:05. > :10:08.employees in the public sector. think that letter says he's not

:10:08. > :10:14.ruling out this kind of tax arrangement in future? I think he's

:10:14. > :10:19.not ruling it out in the way that I nevered from what he said in the

:10:19. > :10:22.House today -- infered from what he said in the House today. I welcomed

:10:22. > :10:32.the quick change of heart in the house today, we have to understand

:10:32. > :10:35.what it means, and understand the role he played in agreeing the

:10:35. > :10:41.particular circumstances. We know for example of the Chief Operating

:10:41. > :10:45.Officer of Rural Payments Agency was paid more than �300,000 from a

:10:45. > :10:48.third party, in 2009/10, when the Labour Government was still in

:10:48. > :10:52.charge, and presumably had signed off exactly the same arrangement.

:10:52. > :10:56.There must be hundreds of these cases? I heard that allegation in

:10:56. > :11:05.the House, if that was the case I would be as shocked about that as I

:11:05. > :11:08.am about the chief executive of the students loans company.

:11:08. > :11:13.Interestingly enough, we don't normally call ministers to my

:11:13. > :11:17.commit year, we look at value for money and implement -- committee,

:11:17. > :11:20.we look at value for money and implementation of policy. There is

:11:20. > :11:24.a difference between appointing someone as a full-time employee to

:11:24. > :11:30.run an organisation, they should pay, like you and I do, their

:11:30. > :11:35.national insurance con tribbuegss and their tax. You -- Contributions

:11:35. > :11:40.and their tax. We will certainly look at it. There is a difference

:11:40. > :11:43.in that and bringing in somebody on a short-term contract to cover an

:11:43. > :11:48.absence or a position if somebody has been dismissed or a maternity

:11:48. > :11:53.leave, those sorts of situations. That is why you can't conflait the

:11:53. > :11:56.two. This appointment was a full- time appointment, to run a non-

:11:56. > :12:03.departmental public body, it is not acceptable. The Government should

:12:03. > :12:09.lead by example. We will debate this further and discuss whether

:12:09. > :12:17.tax avoidance is a force for good or evil. We have the columnist for

:12:17. > :12:23.the Conservative Home website, and director of Europe Economics, a tax

:12:23. > :12:28.specialist and author Eoin Jones. Do you think that Danny Alexander

:12:28. > :12:31.moved very quickly to close that tax arrangement, was he right to do

:12:31. > :12:35.so today? It is important to distinguish between cases in which

:12:35. > :12:39.tax is avoided by doing something which is substantially different

:12:39. > :12:42.from the situation in which you would incur tax. Tax ought to be

:12:42. > :12:46.associated with some kind of activity. If there is no change in

:12:46. > :12:50.the real world, and you have merely rebadged an activity to try to

:12:50. > :12:54.avoid tax, my understanding is normally HMRC would not permit that.

:12:54. > :12:57.This was wrong, this case was wrong? I don't know if it is wrong,

:12:57. > :13:01.it is surprising, I don't know the details of this case. I find it

:13:01. > :13:05.surprising that would happen, that kind of forebearance would lap for

:13:05. > :13:10.anybody other than some jet setting multibillionare, where you might

:13:10. > :13:13.have a different arrangement. In terms of general principle, it is a

:13:13. > :13:17.genuine mistake of Danny Alexander going down the route of rhetoric

:13:17. > :13:20.saying there is no place for tax avoidance in Government at all.

:13:20. > :13:24.People might ask questions about the tax arrangements of the many

:13:24. > :13:27.mull toe millionaires in the cabinets. One of the points about

:13:27. > :13:31.tax avoidance is it is desirable and perfectly moral. When it

:13:31. > :13:35.involves a change in activity, the Government encourages us to avoid

:13:35. > :13:39.taxs in all kinds of ways, when it places special taxes on cigarettes

:13:39. > :13:43.and alcohol, it wants us to consume less of them. That is about trying

:13:43. > :13:47.to change people's behaviour, that is specific. Let me ask you if you

:13:47. > :13:51.think that tax avoidance can be desirable and morbl? Absolutely not.

:13:51. > :13:55.We are currently -- morbl? Absolutely not, we are currently

:13:55. > :14:00.going through the biggest cuts since the 1920s, we are promise bid

:14:00. > :14:04.George Osborne we are in it together. Many people -- promised

:14:04. > :14:07.by George Osborne that we are in it together. That is on the backs some

:14:07. > :14:11.of the poorest people in this country. Yesterday Government MPs

:14:12. > :14:16.voted, for example, to take away benefits from cancer patients, and

:14:16. > :14:21.yet up to 25 billion is being lost through tax avoidance. That is

:14:21. > :14:26.money which could, from wealthy individuals, perfectly legally.

:14:26. > :14:30.are not contesting the fact it is a very legal, legitimate process to

:14:30. > :14:36.go through? In a sense that makes it even worse. If we talk about

:14:36. > :14:40.benefit fraud, we hear a lot about benefit fraud, it is worth about

:14:40. > :14:45.�1.2 billion according to Government estimates. The

:14:45. > :14:51.Government comes down like aen to of bricks from -- tonne of bricks

:14:51. > :14:58.on anyone who crosses the line. But wealthy individuals can exploit the

:14:58. > :15:03.a time through the worst cuts since the 1920s, it is morally

:15:03. > :15:08.indefensible. There is this idea that it is always the wealthy that

:15:08. > :15:12.avoid tax, and it is the middle who will do it by tax efficiencies and

:15:12. > :15:15.savings? It is a misconception. We are dealing with something called a

:15:15. > :15:18.personal service company. Those were used around the turn of the

:15:18. > :15:23.millennium, by lots of IT consultants. Actually there is a

:15:23. > :15:26.rule that came in, IR35, a bit of jargon, that really says if you

:15:26. > :15:31.would have been employee, if you didn't have this company, then you

:15:31. > :15:34.should really be treated like an employyo. But if, actually, you

:15:34. > :15:37.have, for example, multiple contracts going on at the same time,

:15:37. > :15:41.if maybe you can choose whether you do the job or you send someone else

:15:41. > :15:45.to do it, whether you have some risk of loss in carrying on your

:15:45. > :15:50.business, then it is perfectly acceptable to have all of those

:15:50. > :15:55.contracts paid into your company which itself pays corporation tax.

:15:55. > :16:00.Is it middle income earners that use this, or predominantly the very

:16:00. > :16:03.wealthy? It is across the board. A lot of people will go to their

:16:03. > :16:09.accountants and say should I set up as a company or sole trader. There

:16:09. > :16:12.is a number of reasons for people to incorporate rather than a self-

:16:12. > :16:16.employed people. It is hypocritical to say, if somebody on a middle

:16:16. > :16:20.income, more than the average wage, is trying to find efficient ways of

:16:20. > :16:23.saving it, because they might not have a pension or maternity leave,

:16:23. > :16:26.you wouldn't have a problem with that, would you? When we are

:16:26. > :16:30.talking about the level of tax avoidance in this country, we are

:16:30. > :16:34.talking about those who have access to top accountants, who are able to

:16:34. > :16:39.exploit the loopholes that exist in this country. If we are talking

:16:39. > :16:45.about tax efficiency, take called tax efficiency, Sir Philip Green,

:16:45. > :16:53.who runs Top Man, a multibillion air strikes he got paid �1.2

:16:53. > :16:58.billion in dividends, because the wife multibillion air strikes he

:16:58. > :17:02.got paid �1.2 billion in dividends, but because his wife is the

:17:02. > :17:08.director of the company and living in Monaco, he got hold of most of

:17:08. > :17:11.that money. So individuals like Philip Green can get hold that have

:17:11. > :17:16.framework, not accessible to ordinary people, most people

:17:16. > :17:20.struggle to support that. disagree fundamentally, it is this

:17:20. > :17:24.line of thought representing an attack on the thought of private

:17:24. > :17:29.property. We have tax in respect of specific activity and uses we make

:17:29. > :17:33.of our resources. If the law does not impose taxes on that, we don't

:17:33. > :17:37.have any obligation to arrange our activities in ways that make us be

:17:37. > :17:40.liable to tax. That's just a mistake. Once we start saying, no,

:17:40. > :17:45.the law is passed and there is some sort of general intention to take

:17:45. > :17:50.some of your stuff, if you don't behave in ways by this general

:17:50. > :17:55.intention, we will take the stuff any way, that is an attack on the

:17:55. > :18:00.concept of my personal ownership on things. I think we don't have a

:18:00. > :18:04.moral obligation to pay any more tax than the state imposes on us.

:18:04. > :18:08.This is a deep philosophical question, but eye singsly do you

:18:08. > :18:12.think that hold -- essentially, do you think that holds, if businesses

:18:12. > :18:18.find ways of not paying as much tax as they want to, they are more

:18:18. > :18:21.likely to invest in the UK and stay here? Rules play be established to

:18:21. > :18:25.support an individual in creating their own business. Which is what I

:18:25. > :18:33.understand these sorts of rules to be. When they are then exploited,

:18:33. > :18:39.legally, but exploited, to bring greater benefit to individuals who

:18:40. > :18:43.should anybody that catagory, that is a tax avoidance loophole we

:18:43. > :18:48.should close. If that expectation brings more jobs, employment and

:18:48. > :18:53.growth to the economy, do you start calling it expectation and call it

:18:53. > :18:58.efficiency? Well, I don't think, remember that when you pay your

:18:58. > :19:05.taxes, those taxes are money that is used also to create jobs and

:19:05. > :19:10.services. It isn't an either or, in the way you suggest. I think in

:19:10. > :19:14.erpls it of public services, where I started, if -- terms of public

:19:14. > :19:17.services, if you are an employee, as this person appeared to be, he

:19:17. > :19:20.took advantage of a scheme that may have been established to help

:19:20. > :19:26.individuals grow their own business, or have a portfolio of employment,

:19:26. > :19:31.he took advantage of that to pay less tax, and the disbenefit of

:19:31. > :19:35.that, the people who suffer, are actually the public that we are

:19:35. > :19:38.talking about that don't get the money they want. This must be

:19:39. > :19:42.widespread? One fundamental issue, going back to the issue of what

:19:42. > :19:46.level of wealth is employed in using a personal service company. I

:19:46. > :19:48.was interested in consulting the revenue website today, one of the

:19:48. > :19:54.deciding factors, to help individuals work out whether they

:19:54. > :20:04.are caught by the rules, is do you bring your own tools, or do you use

:20:04. > :20:08.

:20:08. > :20:14.that of your client? Just talking about the tools it is talking about

:20:14. > :20:18.plumbers and painters, not people with technological jobs. Small

:20:18. > :20:23.businesses are facing clampdown from HMRC. Just talking about they

:20:23. > :20:25.employ workers and bringing wealth into the economy. Most people

:20:25. > :20:30.accept that regardless, all businesses have to play by the

:20:30. > :20:36.rules of a country. If we take Philip Green, who doesn't pay a

:20:36. > :20:41.living wage to his employees, those wages end up being topped up by the

:20:41. > :20:47.taxpayer by tax credits. He's not here to defend that? The HMRC faces

:20:47. > :20:50.huge cuts, which means it won't be able to enforce. Is this about

:20:50. > :20:53.political momentum of the fairness agenda, do you broadly think that

:20:53. > :20:57.it's not fair, because some people are earning a lot more than other

:20:57. > :21:00.people, is that where you would start from? No it is the fact that

:21:00. > :21:07.at the moment the top 20%, for example, pay less as a proportion

:21:07. > :21:11.of their income than the bottom 20%. It is about the...It Is a

:21:11. > :21:16.combination of a collectivisation of the notion of property, plus,

:21:16. > :21:18.however, a sense that particular schemes in particular cases apply

:21:18. > :21:23.to different individual that is wouldn't apply to the rest of us.

:21:23. > :21:28.That is at the core of the sense of unfairness about this specific case.

:21:28. > :21:32.Who or what was behind the bloody violence that saw more than 70

:21:32. > :21:36.people killed at an Egyptian football riot last night. Today,

:21:36. > :21:41.thousands of demonstrators had teargas fired at them in Cairo's

:21:41. > :21:44.Tahrir Square, as they attempted to carry the protests to the door of

:21:44. > :21:48.the Interior Ministry, whom many blame for the violence. Questions

:21:48. > :21:52.are being asked as to whether there was a political motivation behind

:21:53. > :21:59.the rioting, from supporters of the old Egyptian regime. We will debate

:21:59. > :22:06.where this leaves Egypt's political future.

:22:06. > :22:12.As the train from Porto Santo Stefano pulled into Cairo today, --

:22:12. > :22:15.Port Said, pulled into Cairo today, relatives from those at the game

:22:15. > :22:20.waited. TRANSLATION: My son hasn't answered his phone since yesterday,

:22:20. > :22:24.and I want to know what is going on, he's 18 years old, please, please

:22:24. > :22:29.help look for him. On the streets of the Egyptian

:22:29. > :22:39.capital, there was as much anger as grief. Head to go Tahrir Square,

:22:39. > :22:40.

:22:40. > :22:45.supporters of of one of the country's most formidable teams.

:22:45. > :22:48.They call themselves The Ultras, they believe the attack on them

:22:48. > :22:55.last night was an act of revenge, orchestrated by the security forces.

:22:55. > :23:00.This was the scene minutes after the local team, al-Masry,

:23:00. > :23:03.unexpectedly beat al-Ahlyly the visitors.

:23:03. > :23:08.Police appeared to standby as the pitch was invaded from the stands,

:23:08. > :23:13.men, armed with knives, attacked the team's players and support yos.

:23:13. > :23:23.Both the players of Alaa and al- Masry have no doubt this was

:23:23. > :23:25.

:23:25. > :23:28.allowed to happen. They awe -- Damhon Albarnly, and Alaa -- Al-

:23:28. > :23:37.Ahly and all Massa have no doubt this was allowed to happen. One of

:23:37. > :23:45.the players said they have no doubt, you couldn't imagine it a fan died

:23:45. > :23:49.in their arms. Some Al-Ahly were stabbed and most clubbed, most were

:23:49. > :23:53.killed in the crush as they tried to desperately escape. Were the

:23:53. > :23:56.perpetrators local fans who hate their long standing rivals, some

:23:56. > :24:00.say not. A former player of the club, he was just outside the

:24:00. > :24:06.stadium, he said that at half time, and second half and towards the end

:24:06. > :24:16.of the game, people were arriving in taxies, armed, and being allowed

:24:16. > :24:19.

:24:19. > :24:24.in to the taid yum. Even -- stadium, eventhough they weren't part of the

:24:24. > :24:28.game. Today the first bodies were buried.

:24:28. > :24:31.With the tensions in Egypt unfinished, many refuse to believe

:24:32. > :24:36.that the police failure to keep order at last night's game was

:24:36. > :24:40.simply incompetence. They believe the tragedy was deliberately

:24:40. > :24:43.provoked, or allowed to happen by supporters of the old regime.

:24:43. > :24:48.Perhaps specifically by the ruling Military Council, to try to show,

:24:48. > :24:55.that without a firm hand from above, Egypt may dissolve into chaos.

:24:55. > :25:01.It is no coincidence, say conspiracy therapists, say it is

:25:01. > :25:06.exactly one year of the battle of the camel, the day the Mubarak

:25:06. > :25:10.regime sent camels and shoress into Tahrir Square to crush the

:25:10. > :25:14.revolution. Those chooses chose last night to show they haven't

:25:14. > :25:19.gone away, despite democratic elections and the suspension of

:25:19. > :25:22.some police powers. This is a way to say they will not give up power,

:25:23. > :25:29.they want the Egyptian people and break the revolution and the

:25:29. > :25:33.Egyptian people. They have been forced to suspend the emergency law

:25:34. > :25:37.throughout this week, throughout this week we have seen a heightened

:25:37. > :25:42.and increased criminal activity. It is another way to scare people and

:25:42. > :25:47.have the Egyptians beg the Military Council to assume more power and

:25:47. > :25:50.responsibility. But is it possible that the police, who themselves

:25:50. > :25:54.demonstrated during the fall of Mubarak last year, and who later

:25:54. > :25:58.largely disappeared from the streets, are simply no longer

:25:58. > :26:02.capable of controlling an ever more volatile country. There are so many

:26:02. > :26:07.problems in Egypt today, many of them are blamed on all kinds of

:26:07. > :26:11.conspiracy theories, that is not true. There are some systemic

:26:11. > :26:19.problems with the legacy of Mubarak. Shall we say the dysfuntionality of

:26:19. > :26:25.the Egyptian state is a legacy of Mubarak.

:26:25. > :26:31.But tonight, with the Ultras, and thousands of other protestors,

:26:31. > :26:34.marching on the Interior Ministry, and braving teargas, angry at the

:26:34. > :26:40.security forces and the failure so far to complete the transition to

:26:40. > :26:43.democracy, is driving a new cycle of violence.

:26:43. > :26:50.The conspiracy theorists will say that is exactly what the

:26:50. > :26:55.authorities wanted. With me now is Nesrine Malik, a

:26:55. > :26:59.Middle East specialist, and Dr Hossam Abdalla, of Egypt's National

:26:59. > :27:06.Association for Change, a coalition of mainly secular opposition

:27:06. > :27:10.parties. Welcome to you both. Can we, Dr Abdalla, see this as simply

:27:10. > :27:13.incompetence, bad crowd organisation? Not at all.

:27:13. > :27:19.It comes as a series of different things happening throughout. It is

:27:19. > :27:24.not only about what happened yesterday, in November 42

:27:24. > :27:28.Christians, Coptic, have been killed, and another 40 have been

:27:28. > :27:33.killed in November, and then in December another 17 or 18, all

:27:33. > :27:37.killed by the army, directly being shot. In this country, there has

:27:37. > :27:42.been scaremongering throughout the country, that the 25th of January

:27:42. > :27:46.will descend into chaos. More than one million people went orderly

:27:46. > :27:51.into the street to continue the revolution, despite all the things

:27:51. > :27:57.the army were putting. The army want to stay in power by any means.

:27:57. > :28:02.The only reason they have reduced their state to June, is the

:28:02. > :28:06.pressure of the people. If you want to find it, you can definitely see

:28:06. > :28:10.landmarks and points along the way? It is a bit of both, to be honest.

:28:10. > :28:14.There are lots of indication that is there is something suspicious

:28:14. > :28:18.happening, something conspiratoral did happen in the stadium, there is,

:28:18. > :28:22.as your guest on the report said, there is a legacy of a dysfuntional

:28:22. > :28:27.state. I think it is a combination of these two things. You have a

:28:27. > :28:32.security system and a police system that has melted away, since January

:28:33. > :28:36.25th of last year. There is some kind of passive aggressive

:28:36. > :28:39.behaviour on behalf of the police forces. What do you mean by that?

:28:39. > :28:42.The police is essentially controlled by the military, they

:28:42. > :28:48.are now the state? But the police independently has its own problems,

:28:48. > :28:51.with the football Ultras, they were effectively defeated by them in the

:28:51. > :28:56.revolution. I don't think it is unreasonable to assume they

:28:56. > :29:03.deliberately held back. In some kind of passive aggressive gesture,

:29:03. > :29:06.not to intervene, when the conflicts began. I don't think the

:29:06. > :29:11.fact it is incompetence makes it any less of a crime, it is still a

:29:11. > :29:15.huge failure. You are saying it is failure to react as opposed to

:29:16. > :29:20.fermenting the situation? I think it is a combination of the things.

:29:20. > :29:25.There are two levels here, failure or incompetence both should be

:29:25. > :29:28.really defeated F the army after one year of rule is incompetent, or

:29:28. > :29:33.conspiring against the people to create a state of chaos, in which

:29:33. > :29:36.they can continue. In both cases Government should move into

:29:36. > :29:42.civilian hands. We have an elected parliament, parliament should take

:29:42. > :29:46.the rein of power, and the army go back to the barracks and reorganise

:29:46. > :29:52.the police force to save the people. In Egypt we are being punished

:29:52. > :29:58.because we revolted against Mubarak, by the army and the police.

:29:58. > :30:05.could bring people together? People are galvanised constantly. Out on

:30:05. > :30:07.the streets constantly. One year they tried to do away with that and

:30:07. > :30:12.they couldn't. They accused the people in the streets of destroying

:30:12. > :30:18.the economy, but the armyo and police put together are prevending

:30:18. > :30:23.that. Why -- preventing that. Why do you think a year later we are

:30:23. > :30:27.talking about the systemic problems of Mubarak? Mubarak and his regime

:30:27. > :30:31.were in power for 40 years, you can't dismantle that overnight. The

:30:31. > :30:34.army, I completely agree, whether incompetence and conspiracy, it is

:30:34. > :30:38.a fill your on behalf of the military. A year is not overnight,

:30:38. > :30:43.it should be long enough to start getting the democratic process

:30:43. > :30:49.under way? You have a military entrenched in a curive function

:30:49. > :30:53.that is not curive. It is not governing in a way that is

:30:53. > :30:58.protective of the Egyptian people. It is still clinging on to the old

:30:58. > :31:02.system and structures. Caught between and be twix. They can't

:31:02. > :31:08.reform, but at the same time they can't return to the barracks, the

:31:08. > :31:12.problem is the military. That cedes power to civilians, then you have a

:31:12. > :31:15.healthy momentum. As long as we are caught in the trench of a Catch 22,

:31:15. > :31:20.I think these problems will continue. It is about the economic

:31:20. > :31:25.interest and other things. If you look at the whole Arab Spring, it

:31:25. > :31:28.is a vote of the people against military rule. If you lock at the

:31:28. > :31:32.Arab Spring now, and coins like Syria will be looking to Egypt,

:31:32. > :31:36.their poster girl has gone? It is an incomplete revolution, the

:31:36. > :31:40.revolution will be run by getting rid of military rule. The military

:31:40. > :31:45.have ruled for 60 years in Egypt, the rest of the Arab world

:31:45. > :31:47.mimicking Egypt, we need to get rid of it, they are liars, they lie, we

:31:47. > :31:52.know that they know that they are lying.

:31:52. > :31:57.Thank you very much. Should civil partnerships be

:31:57. > :32:00.blessed by the Church of England, so far the General Synod has banned

:32:00. > :32:05.partnership ceremonies. Now a hundred or more priests have signed

:32:05. > :32:09.a letter demanding the right to conduct them in their churches.

:32:09. > :32:13.Yesterday the Government -- last year the Government lifted a ban on

:32:13. > :32:18.using religious buildings for celebration of gay marriages. Now

:32:18. > :32:21.the debate on what a civil partnership means must be had first.

:32:21. > :32:25.The Anglican community has never been afraid of a good argument. In

:32:25. > :32:28.recent years the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williamss, has

:32:29. > :32:36.presided over rows of the anointment of gay bishops,

:32:36. > :32:40.ordination of women and general reform. Now with the General Synod

:32:40. > :32:44.meeting next week they are gearing up for another fight, over whether

:32:44. > :32:51.blessing civil partnerships. John Sentamu has refused the idea,

:32:51. > :32:55.saying the church's idea of marriage is a union between man and

:32:55. > :32:59.woman. Jim Broadbent says the church has thinking to do --

:32:59. > :33:03.Bordeaux Wine Trading Company bored says the church has thinking to do

:33:03. > :33:06.on -- Broadbent says the church has thinking to do. We all understand

:33:06. > :33:11.marriage, it is a public commitment between people two people. We don't

:33:11. > :33:14.have a ceremony for blessing people who are living together. Precisely

:33:14. > :33:18.because they have chosen a different way of committing

:33:18. > :33:21.themselves to each other. We haven't yet worked out what we mean

:33:21. > :33:26.by civil partnership, and therefore we haven't got a straight

:33:26. > :33:29.understanding, a theology in the church's terms of what we mean.

:33:29. > :33:33.Traditional marriages, even amongst divorced couples have been blessed

:33:33. > :33:38.here for years, but the bishop says he's unsure whether that blessing

:33:38. > :33:42.should be extended to same-sex couples? The jury is out, you don't

:33:42. > :33:46.know the effect long-term of what same-sex relationships are likely

:33:46. > :33:50.to be. They have only been public for the last 20, 30 years in that

:33:50. > :33:54.particular way. We have only had civil partnerships for a short time

:33:54. > :33:56.in our society. We need to look at the long-term effects on society of

:33:56. > :34:01.changing our understanding of marriage, if that is what the

:34:01. > :34:06.Government wants us to do. Because your concern is what? My concern is

:34:06. > :34:11.the stability of society is always affected by the way in which we

:34:11. > :34:14.legitimise relationships. What would happen if you

:34:14. > :34:18.legitimised the wrong ones? might not be good for the whole of

:34:18. > :34:22.society overall, we don't know. That's why we need the discussion.

:34:22. > :34:27.The church that was born of a marriage controversy some 500 years

:34:27. > :34:31.ago, is once again struggling to decide whether to move with the

:34:31. > :34:37.political tide or hold out for something many within it still hold

:34:37. > :34:41.dear. With me now are the form er Canon

:34:41. > :34:45.Chancellor of St Paul's Cathedral, Giles Fraser, one of the

:34:45. > :34:49.signatories in favour of blessings for civil partnerships, and a

:34:49. > :34:52.member of the General Synod. Thank you very much to both of you for

:34:52. > :34:56.coming in. It was quite interesting, Giles Fraser, talking to the bishop

:34:56. > :35:00.this afternoon, that while, as he said, the jury is still out, there

:35:00. > :35:04.is this caution, there is a concern that civil partnerships might not

:35:04. > :35:09.be beneficial to society? I don't see how that would be the case, I

:35:09. > :35:15.mean and I don't see how he knows that. What the signatories of this

:35:15. > :35:20.letter want is to affirm permanent faithful, stable, gay relationships,

:35:20. > :35:24.in civil partnerships, and have those affirmed in church. We're

:35:24. > :35:28.responding to the needs of the people on the ground. We find God

:35:28. > :35:34.in the needs of the people who come to us in our churches, and wanting

:35:34. > :35:38.to do this. It seems bizarre that we turn them away and say that we

:35:38. > :35:43.cannot bless them when they come to church. We can bless battleships,

:35:43. > :35:48.we can bless pets at the pet service. You can bless without

:35:48. > :35:52.conducting a ceremony that legitimises that? No, having that

:35:52. > :35:54.in church, and celebrating two people's love for each other is

:35:55. > :35:58.something we should certainly be doing, we should not be turning

:35:58. > :36:04.people away and saying we have nothing to offer them. Isn't that

:36:04. > :36:07.what pastoral care is all about? Pastoral care for those with same-

:36:07. > :36:12.sex attraction is something that is very important, and something that

:36:12. > :36:18.the church is working on. Pastoral care and support for friendships in

:36:18. > :36:22.a very lonely society is very important, but that's not. You have

:36:22. > :36:26.heard about the importance of recognising what are essentially

:36:26. > :36:29.stable committed relationships, why wouldn't you do that? The stable

:36:29. > :36:32.committed relationship at the foundation of society is marriage

:36:32. > :36:38.between a man and a woman, which is the foundation of the family, which

:36:38. > :36:43.is the best context for raising children. Now that's been shown in

:36:43. > :36:47.study after study after study. The church identifies that as marriage,

:36:47. > :36:52.the problem with civil partnerships is, sorry, the problem with civil

:36:53. > :36:56.partnerships is what started off as remedys a real injustice, and we

:36:56. > :37:02.were all in support of going forward with civil partnerships, as

:37:02. > :37:05.long as they included those who were siblings, those who had family

:37:06. > :37:10.relationships with each other, but those relationships were banned.

:37:10. > :37:15.And they were banned in order that what we could have would be

:37:15. > :37:19.something that would mimic marriage. I would like to see the law revised

:37:19. > :37:24.so that sisters, brothers and sisters, siblings, those who have

:37:24. > :37:28.family relationships could have a civil partnership, and a great

:37:28. > :37:33.injustice that they cannot inherit property from each other could be

:37:33. > :37:36.remedied. Isn't that a coppout, you are trying to see the liberals as

:37:36. > :37:41.being less inclusive than you are with this? Exactly. I don't

:37:41. > :37:44.understand that argument at all, I'm afraid. This is about gay

:37:44. > :37:50.people wanting to come and celebrate their love for each other

:37:50. > :37:53.in church. Jesus said nothing about homosexuality, but he said a great

:37:53. > :38:01.deal about the way in which the religious establishment often kept

:38:01. > :38:07.people from God, that is what is going on here. The concern is, this

:38:07. > :38:11.may match the political weather vane of the times, but the church

:38:11. > :38:16.has never been afraid to stick to what it believes in? Exactly, it

:38:16. > :38:18.believes in permanent, faithful, stable, loving relationships and

:38:18. > :38:23.affirming them. This is not coming from political pressure, but the

:38:23. > :38:28.needs of the people on the ground who are coming to us, in our

:38:28. > :38:34.churches, and asking us for blessing and for love and for care.

:38:34. > :38:38.The Diocese of London is not a trendy liberal diocese, it is a

:38:38. > :38:42.very conservative diocese, 120 Clergy signed this letter precisely

:38:42. > :38:46.because they meet that need day in day out. The risk is you isolate

:38:46. > :38:49.these people and turn them off faith? Not at all, there is two

:38:49. > :38:54.different things being talked about here. We are talking on the one

:38:54. > :38:59.hand about the need to provide the proper basis of society, marriage

:38:59. > :39:03.between a man and a woman, family, and we're talking about the proper

:39:03. > :39:06.support of friendships, the proper support of people who want to care

:39:06. > :39:11.for each other. To confuse the thing. People will say the church

:39:11. > :39:15.is out of step? The church is out of step on a lot of things, on the

:39:15. > :39:18.matter of welfare, capping welfare benefits, and is not afraid to

:39:18. > :39:21.speak against that. We remember the bishops in the House of Lords last

:39:22. > :39:25.week, being out of step with society is no charge against the

:39:25. > :39:29.church, it often has, and often needs to be. But the point is, we

:39:29. > :39:33.are confusing two things. We are confusing God's purpose for the

:39:33. > :39:36.best of society, which is marriage is between a man and a woman, and

:39:36. > :39:39.the problem we have with civil partnerships at the moment, is the

:39:39. > :39:44.slippery slope, we were told, first of all, this is nothing to do with

:39:44. > :39:50.marriage, it is just an economic arrangement, then we're told, well

:39:50. > :39:55.now we are going to have it in religious premises. Would you be

:39:55. > :39:59.horrified to see gay marriage sanctioned by the church? I would

:39:59. > :40:04.think that would be completely contrary to the church's foundation

:40:04. > :40:09.documents of scripture and the church's teaching since the time of

:40:09. > :40:12.Jesus, Jesus of course didn't say anything as such about

:40:13. > :40:17.homosexuality relationships, he said a great deal about matter j

:40:17. > :40:21.and a great deal about those things that are in marriage. Do you feel

:40:21. > :40:26.out of step with the other side of your church? The great thing about

:40:26. > :40:30.the Church of England is it is broad church. Canon Sugden and I

:40:31. > :40:35.are in the same church, and the great thing about the Anglican DNA

:40:35. > :40:38.is it is inclusive and glues us together. This letter says it is

:40:38. > :40:42.down to individual conscience, which is way of holding us all

:40:42. > :40:47.together in the big tent of Anglicanism.

:40:47. > :40:51.The painter, Lucian Freud, who died last year, was famous for the

:40:51. > :40:58.unsparing gaze he trained upon the subject of his portraits, one

:40:58. > :41:04.critic wrote about the unconsoling canned dor of the nueds he painted.

:41:04. > :41:11.-- candour of the nudes he painted. A great exhibition will be opening

:41:12. > :41:21.soon in London, and Stephen Smith, an artist, has been speaking to his

:41:22. > :41:24.

:41:24. > :41:28.daughter, Esther Freud, her first interview since her father's death.

:41:28. > :41:32.I'm sure lots of models used to long for the look of their painting

:41:32. > :41:36.to be easier on the eye than it ended up being. But I think the

:41:36. > :41:42.more people knew his work, you started to appreciate how rigorous

:41:42. > :41:46.he was, when he looked at anything. He looked at it with a hawk-like

:41:46. > :41:51.stare. He didn't just glaze over and look and see what he wanted to

:41:51. > :41:56.see, he tried to see what he really saw. The idea that people shouldn't

:41:56. > :42:00.look like that at each other, seems completely crazy. Obviously, if you

:42:00. > :42:04.are really courageous, you do look, it doesn't mean you lock with

:42:04. > :42:08.aggression, you just look -- look with aggression, you just look with

:42:08. > :42:18.open eyes. For any art form you have to do that. The more

:42:18. > :42:24.

:42:24. > :42:28.penetratingly you look at someone, the more you will find there.

:42:28. > :42:32.you feel self-conscious sitting for your father, in one of them you are

:42:33. > :42:37.not wearing anything? I never felt self-conscious about wearing

:42:37. > :42:40.clothes or being naked, I was used to art being created out of family

:42:40. > :42:45.and friends. You feel you are contributing to something really

:42:45. > :42:48.wonderful, and the rest of the world fades away. A little cocoon

:42:48. > :42:52.of an ancient world you dip into, where the phone didn't ring, and

:42:52. > :42:56.no-one was going to ring the doorbell. He managed to keep life

:42:56. > :43:06.at bay, in order to get on with his work. He was very, very strict

:43:06. > :43:10.

:43:10. > :43:17.He was an extraordinary honest person, and so you knew where you

:43:17. > :43:20.were with him. He didn't pretend to be capable of things he wasn't

:43:20. > :43:26.capable of. Although he was a very unusual person, and an unusual

:43:26. > :43:30.father to have, he didn't say, oh I'll take you to the zoo, and then

:43:30. > :43:33.not turn up, he never said he would take you to the zoo, it was out of

:43:34. > :43:38.the question. You really knew where you were, something very comforting

:43:38. > :43:43.about that. Could it be scary to be with your father, was that a

:43:43. > :43:47.slightly edge of the seat experience sometimes? Yes. He

:43:47. > :43:51.created a sense of danger around him. I remember as children once we

:43:51. > :43:56.decided to drive to Scotland, he wanted to visit some people that we

:43:57. > :44:01.were also friends with. We drove in this wonderful old car, very fast,

:44:01. > :44:05.chatting away. Then after quite a long time we realised we were being

:44:05. > :44:09.followed by the police. We pulled over and the policeman said do you

:44:09. > :44:17.know how fast you were going. They said we have been following you for

:44:17. > :44:21.half an hour you have been going 100. He said we were in a hurry to

:44:21. > :44:27.go to Scotland, but we were actually in Wales. We just headed

:44:27. > :44:32.out of London. It always felt exciting.

:44:32. > :44:35.He once told me when I put a bet on three times in a row and won twice,

:44:35. > :44:40.and the third time lost, and said I don't think I will do that again,

:44:40. > :44:46.he said you're not a gambler. I said I loved winning, he said you

:44:46. > :44:49.have to like losing, that is what a gambler is. He liked losing, it

:44:49. > :44:56.stimulated him, because then he had no money and better do some work.

:44:56. > :45:00.Once he was earning a lot of money for his paintings, it would take

:45:00. > :45:04.too much time to gamble it away, and he wouldn't have time to work,

:45:04. > :45:09.it was counter-productive. seemed to have been extremely

:45:09. > :45:14.single minded, did he have an inner gyroscope, or voice saying this is

:45:14. > :45:19.the thing to do, or was he susceptible to critics? He knew how

:45:19. > :45:23.he wanted it to be. When I first sat for him, he was definitely more

:45:23. > :45:29.frustrated, he used to stab himself with the paint brush sometimes, and

:45:29. > :45:34.stamp. Stab himself with a paint brush? Not drawing blood. Blotches

:45:34. > :45:39.over the tunic? There was a feeling of tension and frustration. Which

:45:39. > :45:48.definitely eased off over the years. He became more patient, maybe his

:45:48. > :45:57.strokes were insurer, and he was less frustrate -- sureer, and he

:45:57. > :46:00.was less frustrated as he got older. He loved to read the papers, he

:46:00. > :46:03.bought every paper every day, looking through it. He was very

:46:03. > :46:06.interested, he had a twinkle in his eye about everything, he was

:46:06. > :46:11.interested in everything and anything, he loved to hear snippets

:46:11. > :46:15.of news stories about people he didn't even know. He had a great

:46:15. > :46:20.zest for life, and he didn't actually want his time to be wasted

:46:20. > :46:25.by having to engage with almost any of it.

:46:25. > :46:29.I really accepted him exact low how he was. He was a very interesting

:46:29. > :46:37.and -- exactly how he was. He was a very interesting and exciting

:46:37. > :46:43.father he was. I knew he was different from other fathers, but I

:46:43. > :46:46.always felt lucky. Esther Freud talking there, the exhibition of

:46:46. > :46:48.Lucian Freud opens next week. That's all tonight, Gavin's here

:46:48. > :46:58.tomorrow, from all of us here, good tomorrow, from all of us here, good

:46:58. > :47:22.

:47:22. > :47:28.Another cold and frostyo start tomorrow morning, one or two snow

:47:28. > :47:31.showers across the east, across Kent. For the vast majority it is a

:47:31. > :47:35.sunny but bitterly cold winter's day once more. There will be fine

:47:35. > :47:41.conditions across much of northern England, eventually temperatures

:47:41. > :47:47.will creep bofr freezing. It could see snow heading towards East

:47:47. > :47:52.Anglia on Friday evening. For most of the day it will be sunny, South-

:47:52. > :47:56.West expect sparkling blue skies. With winds it will feel less cold

:47:56. > :47:59.than recent days, lots of sunshine to come across Wales, a fine day

:47:59. > :48:03.here. Fine for most of Northern Ireland, dry and bright in the east,

:48:03. > :48:08.but in the west it will cloud over with wet weather edging in here, we

:48:08. > :48:12.could see snow over the tops of the hills, that rain eventually

:48:12. > :48:15.reaching the Western Isles and Scotland. Scotland dry, fine and

:48:15. > :48:19.sunny but cold. We will see wet weather working across the country

:48:19. > :48:22.on Saturday. As it arrives it could well bring a little bit of snow

:48:22. > :48:25.across parts of Scotland in Northern Ireland, more likely

:48:25. > :48:29.further south to bring heavier snow on Saturday night. Some uncertainty

:48:29. > :48:32.about where exactly the snow will fall, exactly how much there will

:48:32. > :48:36.be, as the wet weather bumps into the cold air, we could well start