22/02/2012 Newsnight


In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines with Gavin Esler.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 22/02/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Will it take the deaths of foreign journalists in Syria to stir the


conscience of the world? The indiscriminate shellings of


civilians by the Syrian regime, has all the characteristics of a war


crime, many more said to be killed today, including the Sunday Times


journalist, Marie Colvin. Do we have any choice, but to stand and


watch. We will debate intervention with in Syria with Paul Wolfowitz,


Rory Stewart and a leading figure in the Syrian opposition.


Austerity, is it the right prescription for Europe's sickness,


Sweden's Prime Minister is here to tell us what he thinks of that, and


David Cameron's euroveto. And dangerous dogs, Newsnight can


reveal, kenneling is costing the police almost �4 million, with a


tax increase -- attacks increasing, we will debate whether new laws are


needed. REPORTER: Are you aware your dog tried to bite the


cameraman? She tried to bite her leg? It looked like that, but she


didn't. Good evening, an Arab people,


unpopular dictator on his way out and shelling of civilians, when


that happened in Benghazi it led to the west bombing them out of power.


In the last interview yesterday, Sunday Times reporter, Marie Colvin


asked the question we will explore tonight, how can the international


community continue to watch what she described as war crime. Our


diplomatic editor, Mark Urban is with us, talk us through this.


Since a failure at the UN to get a diplomatic solution, the battle has


been the focus of the struggle. We can look in more detail now. Syria,


many different types of people there. It is a multiconfessional


country, if you like, President Assad, basis his support on his own


Alawite sect of the Shi'ite community and the Christians. Those


two groups are concentrated in the area we have shown in red. The


flourishing of armed opposition has been in the area of Homs, one place


where the called Free Syrian Army first appeared, and up there on the


Turkish border in a town called Idlib. All orders of escalation in


activities has happened in recent months, that has seen the


Government's forces, which on paper have hundreds of thousands really


hard pushed. Why? Because the effective mobile forces they have


are much smaller than that. You have the Republican Guard division,


the real last line of defence, if you like, in Damascus, protecting


the Government itself. But because opposition groups appeared in the


suburbs of the city, the fourth mechanised division under the


President's brother, has engaged in the last few weeks between Damascus


and the Lebanese border, another mechanised division down near the


Jordanian border, near the city of Deraa, the 90th Brigade, pretty


much a be second rate lot have been left to try to work things out


militarily in Homs. Other forces have been sent up towards Idlib.


You can see they are very stretched. There is probably no more than


40,000 troops in all of those formations added together. The big


question is, can the Government regain control? They clearly think


they can by military means. There is so much evidence to the contrary.


If we look at the situation in the north of the country. Up there you


have that town of Idlib, the Turkish border I will emphasise it


with a yellow line. Proposals today from the French and others, that


Idlib be one of those places that a had you machinetarian corridor will


be opened, the Russians oppose that. In there patrols from the Free


Syrian Army, this is happening since April they have been asking


defectors to come into the northern belt of the country to create a


sort of safe haven. All the time the Syrian army has mounted serious


attempts to get up there and counter-attack, and it has failed.


In the last few days the Free Syrian Army has claimed hundreds of


defectors have come across, they have released images. Some people


doubt the voracity, some say it looks too farm for these people to


be there, when it is near freezing point. They also point out that the


Free Syrian Army, although it has the odd senior officer, I will put


the outline behind the Brigadier, said to have led the men across.


Most of these people, including some of the other officers in the


frontline of the photo, who have been put in there to make it look


like they are in authority, they are mere pip squeak Lieutenants,


they don't have the senior officers, who remain, by and large, loyal to


the regime. How is the conflict likely to develop now? It means


these very stretched Syrian army forces, the ones they can still


rely upon, are left moving about from one emergency to another,


never quite getting on top of it. The Free Syrian Army never quite


able to get the better of them either. They are trying desperately


hard in places like Homs, to seal in the revolt, put the Free Syrian


Army symbol on Baba Amr, the suburb of Homs, where there has been so


much trouble in the last few weeks. Many say most of their fighters


have left that area. The Syrian army, we know, has a large camp to


the south, it has mechanised forces. It is also using some of its armour


to spwra direct the countryside between Baba Amr and the will he


beties border, the infiltration routes, of course, it has been


using artillery against the suburb, for fear of sending its people in.


This picture of a gun line, released by the Americans a couple


of weeks ago. That is in the south of the city, where we showed you


the Government tanks are. If we go on further, we see some Government


tanks have approached close to Baba Amr. This is on one of the main


thorough fairs, it is a main cordon, trying to seal the place off. This


is second line stuff, they are not Keith guard formations, they are


from the second rate unit here Homs, quite old tanks. Lo and behold


pictures coming in south of where that photo was taken. What is


happening with the T-62s is the crew have defected. You put them


close to the opposition fighters, some will take their chance to


defect. Lo and behold we see the Free Syrian Army fighters have


taken the heavy machine gun off the top of the tank. That is the danger,


if they try to go into the places, their forces might fade away.


do we know about the death of the western journalists? Marie Colvin


and Remi Ochlik, both killed in Baba Amr, that place we showed the


centre of the fighting over the last 18 days, since the heavy


bombardment started. They were using a house, which some people


call a media centre, it seemed to be a sort of safe house for


visiting journalists, which the Free Syrian Army and other


opposition groups were taking people in and out of it. It appears


it was targeted, that is the suggestion. Several military rounds


came in accurately on the house, killing the two journalists,


wounding a few more. They are media organisations are now trying to get


them out this evening. Probably killing anything up to another two


dozen people in the neighbourhood around that house. So it would


appear to be a targeted strike, and the opposition groups say it is a


deliberate attempt by the Government to snuff out independent


reporting. With Russia and China vetoing


resolutions on Syria, is there anything the outside world can and


should. Do Joining me is the former US deputy


Defence Secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, a key player in the Iraq war, the


Conservative MP, Rory Stewart, and Syrian opposition leader, in London


for a few days before returning to Syria. Mr Wolfowitz, is there a


case for outside intervention in Syria, if so, what would it be?


Well, first of all, I think it is worth noting two remarkable facts,


one there is incredibly broad international support to see an end


to the Assad regime. Russia and China are the two countries


standing in the way, it is a very broad consensus. Secondly, the


Syrian people are incredibly brave, this fighting and bloodshed has


been going on for almost a year now, they show no sign of giving up.


There is a lot that can be done, the key goal has to be to try to


achieve a negotiated exit for the Assad regime. Sanctions aren't


going to have much effect when they are fighting for their life. What


will have an effect is strenening the opposition morally, politically


-- strengthening the opposition, morally, politically and materially.


Does that include arming the opposition, do you think? It is


interesting, everyone always jumps to that. Let's start with political.


It is incredibly important, if the opposition is given the opportunity


to speak with a loud voice to the Syrian people and to the world, and


to lay out an agenda that is reassuring, particularly to the


Alawite and Christian minorities, that is something that could hasten


defections are from the regime and hasten an end here. It is not just


about arming. When you come to material support, it is not just


about weaponry. My impression, and all of us are limited in our


information, thank heavens there are journalists as brave as Marie


Colvin to go in there and try to get the story out, she has paid a


terrible price. One of the things they need is


communications gear. Let me bring in Rory Stewart, Marie Colvin was a


friend of your's, you knew her. She said in the BBC interview that she


did yesterday, that no-one here can understand how the international


community can let this happen. She made the comparison to verb nisia.


Do we have to stand and watch this? She was deeply shocked by what was


going on. I would be very cautious, though, of what Paul is saying, in


terms of material support. I don't really see what, credibly, we could


do in terms of arming the rebels. At the moment they have weapons,


they appear to be getting support from places like Qatar. I think it


would be dangerous, it might undermine them to associate Britain


or the United States with them. I would like to take up Paul's


suggestion of focusing much more on the political. The key thing is to


give them a political voice and finding a political solution to the


programme, however nasty or messy that seems. You know your


constituents and others will be watching the TV pictures, and


reacting to Marie Colvin's death, and the death of 80 people today,


perhaps more, and saying this is absolutely terrible, in Srebrenica


we said it wouldn't happen again, and now it is happening again?


There are two things to remember. One of them is our power is limited,


our knowledge is limited, most importantly of all, we need to


listen to the Syrian people and the Syrian opposition. We need to ask


the gentlemen such as this, whether he really wants us to be arming the


rebels, and what that would mean for Syria. What do you want, what


do you need? First of all, I would like to ask peace for the soul of


the journalist Colvin and for the souls of thousands of Syrians that


are being killed every day in Syria. Secondly, we want an international


consensus. We want that the international community would help


us in making this agreement, making this exit. For the problem in Syria,


for this disaster that we are facing. It is not about something


like the friends of Syria, that will happen after tomorrow, those


larger groups of countries together can't make a real exit or real


solutions. Are there material goods, weapons, communications equipment,


political support, are there concrete things that outsiders can


do, that would really help you, given that the view outside is that,


at least, that the opposition is very fragmented, you have no-one


leader or one structure, you have many structures? The opposition is


fragmented, and also the Syrian society is fragmented, and also the


international community is fragmented. It is a problem on all


levels. We are working and we want that for the formation of small


groups of states that can help and make intervention on Syria,


especially with the collaboration of Russia. You can't put Russia


outside the formula or the equation. Let me put that to Mr Wolfowitz,


you can't put Russia outside the equation, yet they don't seem to


want the international consensus that is built? I think they don't.


What might bring them round is if they eventually saw this regime


would eventually lose. That means strengthening the opposition. They


are fragmented, and one reason is because it is very difficult to


communicate between different cities and groups. They are


fragmented in part because I think our contact with them is still


limited, it is growing, but it seems to me we should be meeting


with them much more often and much more conspicuously, and trying to


bring together as many different elements and sending a very loud


message about what the future of Syria might look like. In terms of


outsiders being involved, how involved do you think Iran already


is and Turkey already is, in the case of Iran in supporting the


regime? They are supporting the regime, they are well involved. We


have some media reports that maybe there is a real intervention for


them on the ground. They are on the ground. What I feel we don't want


to do, is end up as we did in Afghanistan in the 1980s, with a


foreign-funded insurgency, taking place from a neighbouring country.


Everything we can do to try to avoid that we should. We may end up


there eventually, but at the moment really a political solution,


pushing Assad, and the Russians, and working with what the Syrian


people want, which is not a fragmented civil war and foreign-


funded insurgency at the moment. The other parallel would be Iraq,


you may have a sectarian civil war in Syria afterwards? There is so


much horror that we have seen in Iraq, we did, of course in Libya,


which is is a place where the population is a third of this size,


and made some progress, but it took months to make the progress. We


will not have that consensus in Syria. We need to be more cautious,


and follow this gentleman's suggestion, there needs to be a


Syrian-led political solution. Wolfowitz, you are worried about


Iran in a slightly different context, I wondered what you


thought Iran's involvement was here, and whether that was of concern to


you too? I think the Iranians just had a couple of ships visit a


Syrian port, and prob below deliver weapons. I'm not as comfortable --


probably deliver weapons, I'm not as comfortable with the idea that


Qatar is supplying the opposition. I don't see how one can expect any


good outcome if the opposition remains largely unarmed or armed by


people whose goals and objectives may be very different from our's. I


understand his concern about the Afghan President, but I would also


say the war in Bosnia went on for three bloody years, because we


insisted on keeping the Bosnians defenceless, eventually we had to


come in with foreign military forces, which it seems to me, we


ought to avoid. I think the goal should be strengthening and


unifying the Syrian opposition. Unfortunately I do think one has to


give the Assad regime a chance, if they leave peacefully, to leave


with their lives. On that thought, what do you make of the appetite in


Washington to get involved in the way in which you are suggesting?


think that the debate is open in Washington. It seems as though, I


mean scam Senator McCain and others have been on the idea of supporting


the opposition. Getting involved, we want to be very careful, nobody


wants to get involved in the way of Iraq. I don't think anyone is


suggesting getting involved in the way we are involved in Libya, there


are many, many things short of that, that could be done to strengthen


the opposition, and increase the chances and the speed of a peaceful


outcome here. The longer this terrible fighting goes on, the


worse the aftermath will be, of that I feel reasonably sure.


The Assad regime may be offered an elegant way out as Paul Wolfowitz


was suggesting, but they may do what Gaddafi did, and fight to the


bitter end? There is a difference, one of the differences is we have


managed to impose the sanctions and take away the oil. Gaddafi was


dealing with full NATO air strikes and hung on for months. We don't


know where that will go. We need to be careful not to make the


situation worse by funding strange factions of insurgent groups we


don't understand, and ending up in a situation in three or four years


time with a fractured and devastated Syria. More on Marie


Colvin, who died today, later, including an interview with a


friend and colleague. Now, at a time when Britain's


supporters at EU meetings on the eurozone crisis are sometimes


difficult to spot, David Cameron has been particularly impressed by


Sweden, and full of admiration for that country's Prime Minister, with


who we will hear from in a moment. Like Britain, Sweden is not in the


eurozone, and it has a centre right leader, who reregards himself as a


moderniser. And Swedes, like Britain, are suspicious of the


group bailout, and very sceptical of the prospect, if ever, of


joining the euro. The Greek bailout was finally


assembled this week, that averted or delayed a default in Athens, and


fears of widespread European economic breakdown. Sweden, like


Britain, remains outside the single currency, but it has profound


implications for the Swedes and its export market. Home of Saab and


IKEA, with fall in the demand for goods biting, growth is slowing.


David Cameron is known to have high regard for the economic and social


reforms implemented by Sweden's centre right Prime Minister,


Fredrik Reinfeldt. I very much admire what Sweden has achieved


under his leadership, the growth of the competitive economy, the


emphasis on green growth, the school reform, the welfare reform,


there is a lot Britain can learn from Sweden. Sweden has indeed been


seen in Britain as a potential ally in Europe, but after waefring over


negotiations on a new treaty in December, Mr Reinfeldt ultimately


distanced himself from the veto, leaving Britain in its isolation,


splend did or otherwise. Joining me is the Swedish Prime Minister,


Fredrik Reinfeldt, despite this week's bailout, how long do you


think it will be before Greece needs another bailout or out of the


euro? It is now in their own hands. They have had time to put in the


reforms they have promised but not followed through. They need a


surplus situation in the Greek economy. It is only in their own


hands to deliver it. When you look at Greece, do you think they are


set a task that is simply impossible, the austerity task


ahead of them is too hard for anybody to deliver? I could


understand if the Greek people feel like that. Ordinary people in


Greece, working, paying their taxes, feeling like they haven't done this,


but they have a great inequality in the society which they should


address. If you look to Sweden, and other countries that have been in


economic trouble, we found that the quicker you put in your reforms and


the more thorough you are in the beginning, the market reactions are


more positive. The criticism we have sometimes had towards Greece


is they have said a lot, but not always put in practice the reforms


they have promised. That is their plob blem. In terms of the Uri --


Problem. In terms of the euro, you are out of it, and committed some


time in the future, vaguely, to join the euro. We have a two-speed


Europe already, are you better out of it? It is a multi-speed Europe,


there are differences to the euro and the Shengen area as well. The


Swedish people said no in a referendum. Now the Swedish krona,


which used to be insecured currency 20 years ago, now is seen as very


stable, and also very strong. But this more reflects the reforms and


the key reforms done to get better order in public finances. Again it


is very much in your own hands. Swedish people have spoken, is


there any point in keeping up the facade that you will at some point


join the euro, your heart isn't in it, which is what we are saying?


respect the result and we will not alter it unless we see a shift in


the opinion polls. The latest opinion polls show a support for


joining the euro down at 10%. It is an enormous increase in support for


keeping the Crown that, because the Crown that in itself, is now very


strong. They like it t of course. As you know, David Cameron is an


admirer of your's, there are similarities between your policies,


why did he end up alone in December at the European Summit. Why did he


end up speaking for Britain alone and not views that you may share


with Britain, in terms of the veto? I'm not sure that we were that far


apart, actually. The eurozone want to have a fiscal compact, that only


should regulations followed by the 17 countries. Outside of that we


have ten countries, including the UK and Sweden. I felt that, well,


we can join this fiscal compact if we could legally stay outside, but


be present during meetings. That combination was interesting for us.


I felt that, well, to David Cameron, he was not as sure of the merits of


this, he wanted to skr -- to have other kinds of things, a clearer


message when it came to the financial sector in London, and in


the UK. That was not possible. So I think it was quite understandable


why he reacted as he did. You use an interesting phrase about being


in the meetings, is that a drawback for you that Britain isn't going to


be in some of those meetings, you will be present and people that you


agree with, Britain, outside? In my own interests I would welcome


the UK, and David to be there. Because I think we have a lot in


common. I think we want to see a well-functioning intefrpbl market.


I think we are very -- internal market. I think we are very open to


trade. We stand very close to each other. Sweden and the UK are two


countries with very large financial sectors, even there we could share


interests. You need to be there, in my belief, to be able to stand up


for your interests. Trade and a lot of these interests, you need to be


there. Was it a tactical mistake for David Cameron not to play the


veto in that way and to be excluded and exclude himself? Then again


that was understandable that he wanted to secure some points, this


was not possible, then we chose another path. I understood his


reasoning. Again, the financial compact in itself is actually only


done for the 17. I also think the feeling in the UK is that you are


more long-term will stay outside the euro, in my country we will


still have a discussion that we might alter this in the future.


There is probably a difference. Thank you very much.


Over the past few weeks we have been witnessing something new at


Westminster. A semi-open discussion, in Government, about what should be


in the budget. In their party political broadcast tonight the


Liberal Democrats repeated the call they made on Newsnight on Monday,


for income tax thresholds to be raised. They aren't the only wupbls


doing the pleaded and plotting d ones doing the pleading and


plotting. What is going on today? Today was the turn of the Tories.


We had Liam Fox, former Defence Secretary, coming out, he called


for a reduction in national insurance on employers. Then this


evening and in tomorrow's Times, we have a senior Tory activist calling


for what can only be described as a mansion tax. But he's specific


about how he would do it. It would have been unthinkable a year ago to


have Tories calling for that sort of thing. What is interesting about


the negotiations before this the budget, if you think about how long


measures in budgets take effect, lots of people are thinking about


the next month's budget as the last chance to do something ahead of the


2015 election. That is why everyone is piling in to make a difference.


Given that is such an important step, politically, and there is


lots of ideas out there, do we have any senses of which ones will win


out in the budget? The Liam Fox one, eventhough viewers will be reading


and hearing a lot about this national insurance idea, when he


was on our programme on Monday night, David Laws ruled that out.


He said the priority, and the tax- cutting priority, in his language,


was what the Liberal Democrats want, which is the increase in the amount


of you can keep before paying tax. That is what they want and they


ruled out the NI. Some sources in Downing Street said it didn't work


in the opening stages of coalition. Eventhough they want it I'm not


sure they will go for it. There is work with wealth tax, behind the


scenes. One of the problems is the Government not only have to find


the pot of money for the Lib Dem idea, it is a joint idea but the


Lib Dems are pushing it. They have to find a way of fund the child


benefit, they have to lessen the impact, that is why we have to look


at ways to raise revenue. There is some movement on pension relief,


now we are listening to interesting ideas. It is budget by former


cabinet minister. What are the Treasury working on, do you think?


There is a range of options, one of them is this problem that the


private sector are sitting on healthy balance sheets, how do you


try to encourage them to get their assets out into the real economy,


rather than sitting and waiting for things to get better and coming in.


There is positive things going on in childcare and social care, there


is big battles but they are trying for good news stories. They have to


amealate some of the bad things, then there is the pension thing we


talked about before. It is complicated and high stakes, and


there is no money. We understood that.


Every day in Britain a dozen postal workers are attacked by dogs as


they deliver our mail. But because the attacks generally take place on


their owner's private property, prosecutions are almost impossible.


In the last year 6,000 adults and children were admitted to dopt


because -- hospital because of dog attacks. Keeping dogs in kennels is


costing the Metropolitan Police �4 million a year. Proposals will be


published next month. What should be done about dangerous dogs o


perhaps their owners. -- or perhaps their owners. We have


become a uby-election tus feature of modern life in Britain, dogs you


would hesitate to pet. Often known as dangerous dogs. They have been


linked to 6,000 attacks a year. Who needs them and what are we going to


do about them? It is amazing how one little person can affect so


many people, like, proper ripple effect, on people's lives. None of


us are the same people, your whole life just changes. You change as a


person, everything you knew is just gone, within seconds. Three years


ago Angela McGlynn's four-year-old son, John Paul, was attacked and


killed by a pitbull here in Liverpool. He was at his granny's


house at the time, the dog was a trusted family pet. She tried her


best to save John Paul, she couldn't, but she saved herself and


my other son, I could have lost all three of them that night. Angela


McGlynn's MP wants to see the law changed on dangerous dogs, at


present it is hard to prosecute owners over attacks which happen on


their own premises, she says, and the Government seems to have fallen


silent on the whole subject. With can't afford to see another


child die. We have seen six children lose their lives since


2006. What we are calling for is the Government to take some action


and respond to their very own consultation, which concluded 20


months ago, we have seen nothing from them, heard nothing, it is not


acceptable. It seemed everyone we met had a story to tell their MP


about an all too close encounter with a dangerous dog. A chap in the


next street got hold of the dog and threw it into the middle of the


road, pushed me into the news agents, and the dog shot off the


road, pushed the news agent's door and got me in the shop itself.


All right lads could we have a word with you for Newsnight about your


dog. Sorry. You got him under control there? Yeah. What is your


dog? What breed is it? A staff crossed with a whippet? It is four


years old. Are you aware your dog just tried to bite our cameraman?


She is just barking. She tried to bite her leg? It looked like, but


she never bite nobody. What have you got a dog like that


for? I just got her. You know. She looks how she looks, aggressive,


but it is absolutely sweet dog. I introduce your local MP. Do you


have any thoughts about this creature and our friend here.


your local member of parliament, I'm campaigning against dogs that


might impact or might hurt or affect other people. I come to this


park every day. (dog barking (she plays with the other dogs, and you


know, never have a situation like this. Would you let her near any


children? No. Are you worried your dog could bite someone? Yeah, any


dog can bite someone. What did you make of that? That is the very


thing I'm concerned about. That man said he was the fifth owner, there


was four previous owners of the dog, he didn't know if he necessarily


had the skills to look after that animal. We saw the dog off the


leash, I was quite scared by the dog, we saw it go for the cameraman,


my concern is about a child in the park, another adult or another dog.


He just walks off to work or whatever he's doing. What on earth


is anyone, including you going to do about that in reality? That is


why we need to see a very, very quick change in the law. The law as


it stands isn't robust enough to deal with that. If there was a dog


warden in the area, or someone from the council, or someone from the


police, they could serve a dog control notice so that owner was


then responsible for ensuring his dog was kept on a lead at all times,


rather than off the lead, as we saw At the moment the law targets only


four breeds of dog. Regardless of what the animals may have done, or


not done. Owners may not be prosecuted over


dog attacks which occur on their own property.


The Freedom of Information by Miss Berger, has revealed the police are


spending almost �4 million on kenneling dogs. In her own area,


Merseyside, they spent almost 300,000, and in London the figure


was the best part of �3 million. The police impounded Bodie here,


because he's an illegal breed, eventhough he has never attacked


anyone. Denise Evans managed to get him returned. She says the real


problem is the way dogs are trained. There are vicious ones of these, I


wouldn't want to come across, they are strong dogs. If you own a dog


like this, you have to be a responsible owner, it is not the


dog but the owner who has to have control of the dog. We need powers


to concentrate on people who use dogs as weapons in the communities,


people seeking to use it as a status, in certain communities that


is of grave concern. We need robust legislation to tackle these


offenders and ensure they understand their responsibility.


The Government said tonight it would announce new proposals on the


control of dogs in the coming weeks. The Labour MP, is in favour of


changes to the current law, and Mark Littlewood, of the Institute


of Economic Affairs, is sceptical new laws are necessary. Do you


think the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act is a waste of pays? The eight


speess -- space? The eight pieces of legislation need to come


together. That is why broad agencies, including enforcement


agencies, and trade unions, you mentioned postal Work In Progress


By A Life In Progressers, and animal welfare groups, we need an


urgent change in the legislation. That is why we needed a


consultation about the legislation. You said the Government said in the


coming weeks. I have heard the Government say it will respond to


its own consultation in the coming weeks for the past 20 months. We


need urgent response from the Government. Why are you against


more legislation on this? We have to put this into context. There is


horrific stories in the package we have seen, but it isn't an enormous


problem. It is if you are bitten? The same number of people die from


wasp and bee bites as from dog bites. It is harrowing if it


happens, but let's not build it out of proportion. We need clear


responsibility on the owner, both criminal conduct, if your dog


attacks another member of the public, and compensation, if there


is an injury. Once you have got that sorted, the last thing we need


is microchipping, local bureaucrats with dog control orders or anything


else. That is not going to make us much safer? This question of


private property, what do you want to see done on that, do you think


it should be the same whether you are bitten by somebody in a garden


by a dog or somebody on the street, is that what you would like to see?


That is one of the five key things we are calling for. That the law


should be extended to cover private property, so victims can get the


justice they deserve if they are attacked on private property as


much as a public place. There is very little powers falling to the


police to pursue anyone if someone is bitten. You pension the postal


workers, every single day 15 postal workers are attacked delivering


mail, social workers visiting houses, there is no resource for


those people. I do think the point about private property, you can


take risks and people can decide to enter it. If you enter my house you


will be encountering smoke, and we have leads everywhere, if there is


a dog you may choose not to bring your children round. There is a


risk for postal workers, you have to say this postman will not visit


41 Dawes of a dangerous dog. I don't think you should -- 41


because of a dangerous dog, I don't think you should apply that to all


private property. If you punch somebody in the street that is a


crime f you punch somebody in your front garden that is a crime, but


not your dog? That is not a comparison. If you punch somebody


in your living room it is accused of a crime, this is a question of a


health and safety risk that might run out of control. If you


deliberately feed the neighbour's kids to the dogs this is a crime,


it is more a negligence and health and safety issue, it is important


that doesn't extend to the living room of private property.


Absolutely disagree. We don't have that power already, and certain


people are not afforded protection, people are disfigured and disabled


every day. It is around 6,000 people hospitalised every year,


that doesn't include people going toe their GPs or accident treatment


centres. 11 deaths I think is too many. That in itself requires a


change in the law. Also for those thousands of people injured. What


about the other things saying, making people having to chip dogs,


many dog owners do. Is that really the problem, or is it bad owners?


It is about encouraging responsible ownership, and beyond the breed to


the deed. There is very little preventive powers extended to the


police or councils to deal with the problem before an attack takes


place. We mentioned before about the cost that the police forces up


and down this country are incurring, they are doing a fantastic job


under very difficult circumstances. They need all the support and


powers afforded to them so they can take action so we don't see another


person die. We don't need to give the police that support, we need to


make it plain the owner bears the responsibility. If it rips yours


jacket the owner has to pay, if it harms you, the owner has to pay


compensation and possibly facing a criminal offence. As long as we


shift responsibility clearly and plainly on to the owner, and don't


make it the responsibility of the police or the local council. Is the


answer licensing, if you are a bad owner you get your license taken


away? In the same way we have compulsory insurance for people who


drive motorcars -- motorcars, there might be compulsory insurance for


certain breeds of dogs. Keep the responsibility with the owner, not


with Of-dog, or whatever bureaucratic agency they want to


set up? It is about empowering owners to be responsible and help


them look after their dogs and make sure they don't cause problems or


attack anyone. Would you be in favour of some licensing system, in


other words, if you didn't look after your dog couldn't have one,


the Government would tell you that? The five key things we are looking


at don't extend to that, I'm open to all options, we just want action.


We have seen action in Northern Ireland and Scotland, and Wales are


going to introduce new legislation by the end of the year. I want this


Government to introduce legislation to consolidate the acts as they


stand, and afford our police and councils additional protections so


we don't see anyone else die. Not surprisingly tomorrow morning's


newspapers have a great deal to say on the death of Marie Colvin. Her


photograph is on the front pages. There is a quote from a speech she


gave in November 2010, giving a service to commemorate war


reporters who died. She's on the front page of the Guardian, she


wanted to finish one more story is its take on the story. The


Independent has the heroic face of journalism, we have seen some of


the other faces of journalism, this is the heroic face. The Telegraph


has baby girls aborted and no questions asked. Joining us to


discuss Marie Colvin's life and work is a fellow reporter, Janine


di Giovanni. How will you remember her? As an incredibly tenacious,


brave, courageous reporter, the one that was always first in and the


last to go. She would stay much longer than anyone. She was


incredibly determined to tell the story, to get the story out, often


at great risk to herself, whether Chechnya, East Timor, or Kosovo.


She really came from that great tradition of reporter of James


Cameron, Martha Gellhorn, whom she greatly admired. I just hope, and I


truly believe that, especially for women, she kind of set the bar for


journalism, for real journalism. And telling the truth and bringing


a Joyce to people who didn't have a voice. -- a voice to people who


didn't have a voice. She was a great crusader of bearing witness,


which is what she called it, for people to tell their stories. She


often said if they want to tell you, they will tell you, and they want


to tell you, they want you to know the truth. She and you more than


anybody, you know the risks you run in those situations. The big


question that people will be asking is why did she do it? With Homs


there is terrible resonance of Sarajevo, a city isolated and the


civilian population is going through hell. There are some


journalists there but not many. She believed that this was a crucial


story to tell, that the world needs to know what's happening, and she


was someone that had the ability to do that. She had the courage, and


she certainly had the experience. She was doing this for more than 25


years. It was a story that needed to be told. You mentioned Martha


Gellhorn, you said that she was a great roll model for journalists,


particularly for women too. Is it different for women in a warzone,


is it easier or more difficult, do people talk to you more? This is


always a question that is asked. I think that there is pros and cons,


obviously a story like this, where she would have had to be smuggled


in to get in, and would have been incred difficult for -- incredibly


difficult for a woman, win she went to Chechnya and was smuggled in,


she had to hike over mountains. Women are not as physically strong


as men, biologically, I think there is that. On the ground women can be


absolutely just as tough and tenacious, and courageous as men. I


think she really was the role model for an entire generation of women


and men, and young reporters, who really want to carry the truth, and


to bring the truth to a wider audience. To go somewhere where one


of our colleagues said to shine a light in the darkest corners of the


world. She was very, listening to that BBC interview that she gave


yesterday, not just very, very motivated, but very committed to


bringing some kind of peace to the people she saw suffering, and to


make us understand that eventhough we live many hundreds of thousands


of miles away? With passion, she had tremendous passion, she once


said she can't write about something unless she was passionate


about it. She was someone, whether it was the Middle East, that was


really her area, and she would hold on to something, and she believed


in it. I remember once saying to her, do you ever let this story go,


she said not when you are in the middle of it, she was living in


Jerusalem at the time. She just lived for her work, she was


completely devoted to it. She would spend months staying somewhere.


Libya, she called it a health farm, because she was there for so long,


and she, at great cost often to one's private life doing this, it


is a very difficult job. She is someone we will never forget.


Thank you very much for paying tribute to Marie Colvin. That's all


for tonight, Kirsty will be here tomorrow, one last piece of news,


tonight at the Royal Television Society News Awards, Newsnight won


news programme of the year, our Good evening. Cloudy, misty and


mild night tonight for many. Particularly misty across these


western areas, foggy start, slowing the commute, with the wind south-


westerly, many of these western and southern parts will remain grey


throughout. To the high ground, north-east England, certainly


through eastern parts of England, temperatures lifting in sunny


spells to 16 or 17. Not opening for too much in the way of sunshine


around the coast, in Torbay to the east of Dartmoor, sunnier breaks.


Through the moors, it is going to rain misty, foggy all day. The


white colours here across the hills and mountains of Wales. With that


thicker cloud comes patchy rain or drizzle. Maybe a little bit of


brightness across and down. Thicker cloud to North West later brings


the wettest spell of the day. Patchy rain or drizzle turning


heavier across the North West of Scotland. Things change across the


north, particularly for Scotland and Northern Ireland, into Friday.


Something brighter, but the temperatures drop, we will slowly


see temperatures drop across England and Wales too, a lot more


cloud on Friday, with patchy rain and drizzle, that comes from a cold