12/03/2012 Newsnight

David Cameron and Barack Obama meet tomorrow in Washington, they

promise to stay the course in Afghanistan, but are they now

heading for an exit strategy even more quickly than planned.

The massacre of children by an American soldier, which has

horrified the country, they say they are protecting, won't change

the overall strategy. We have already been told. What is not

going to happen is the mission would self-resolve as of this, it

is a tragic incident, but it would be a far greater tragedy to let it

affect what we are doing in the country. What is gained by the

troops' presence in this troubled theatre of war.

Not since The Sex Pistols has there been a shortage like it, water is

once again a precious commodity. With water levels in some of

Britain's rivers at record lows, is drought something we will just have

to learn to live with. unspeakable atrocity in Syria, is

there any chance the world agreeing a plan to tame President Assad?

Also tonight. These were the villages, under the

fields was clay, under the clay, coal. The Staffordshire pot rees

gave birth to one of the first great British brands, does it

matter if the Wedgwood collection gets flogged off and dispersed. The

Culture Minister, historian and the teapot tycoon, are with us.

There will be no change of course in Afghanistan, the White House

said today, Downing Street trot the out the same message, Afghan

politician, meanwhile, had demanded the American soldiers who cold-

bloodedly shot 16 villagers, including nine children, be put on

trial there. There are some signs of a change in how US and UK troops

may approach combat operations, we will hear about that shortly. First

Mark Urban on NATO's increasingly strained future in the country. To

the insult of Koran burning has been added the injury of incident,

16 people, nine of them children, killed in a rampage by a deranged

loner. It complicates the search for daiingfied exit from

Afghanistan. The strategy of this week could be expected to further

exacerbate the problems and delays, it is the sort of thing that has

poisoned the atmosphere so far, in terms of night raids, civilian

casualties and so on, it has been problematic. In the aftermath of

yesterday's attack, echos of Iraq, with Afghan parliamentarians asking

forthright to deal with foreign perpetrators in their own courts.

TRANSLATION: The Afghan parliament issued an a resolution today

against the reaction of American soldiers inside Afghanistan, and

asked that the perpetrator should go to court inside Afghanistan.

riots following the burning of the copies of the Koran have claimed

dozens of lives, and perhaps produced a more serious crisis than

yesterday's murders. As attacks on western places have increased, the

Afghan Government has led to the withdrawal of ministries and

halting of restoration work. Karzai Government is full of

corruption, one of the way of improving the Afghan Government's

performance of the presence of the UN community to deter that. Without

the ability to get on the ground caused both by the deteriorating

security situation, and also a reliance on often unreliable Afghan

security guards, it becomes very, very difficult over the remaining

year-and-a-half or so of the international presence.

There are more big issues lurking, as NATO tries to move into the

background. From talking to the Taliban, to relations with Pakistan,

and fighting corruption in Kabul's ministries. But despite that, the

US and Afghan Governments are trying to negotiate a framework

that would allow American troops to stay in the country, beyond the

handover of security in 2014. Although President Karzai's people

have talked today about spending those talks, no-one is saying that

they should be stopped all together. The Karzai Government may not be

strong enough to stand without foreign help, which is why they are

still seeking long-term military aid. But before NATO can get to the

post -withdrawal state, that pull- out itself must happen, without

looking like a shambles. The problems with the Afghan

Government, the way in which corruption has remained a huge

problem. The role of Pakistan's Government not really clamping down

on insurgent sabgt trees, all these structural fundamental problems are

still there. They cast some doubt on the likely success of the

mission. I think we have a better than 50-50 chance of some moderate,

acceptable, minimal standard of success, being achieved, or at

least defeat being avoided. But every single hit like this has to

lower your confidence a little bit. Whatever happens to the speed of

withdrawal, and the difficult relationship with President Karzai,

NATO's leaders are committed to winding down their combat

deployments. Neither side has a practical alternative, and on the

eve of a White House meeting, that was David Cameron's message tonight.

In terms of my talks about President Obama, we have a good

plan, we have a plan which is is about transitioning Afghanistan

over to Afghan control. That plan applies in Helmand as much as

anywhere else. The most important thing is we stick to that plan and

deliver that plan, and then we can bring our troops home, having done

a good job in giving Afghanistan at least a chance of stability and the

prosperity and growth for the future.

The people of Panjwai had already suffered from years of fighting in

their district, it was Taliban stronghold, and few would have

supported the Americans even before yesterday's killing. But the ripple

effects of what happened are now being felt, not least in NATO

capitals, where pessimism grows about Afghanistan.

Mark Urban is with us in the studio. Will there be a change of strategy?

I don't think there is, but they will make it look like there has

been a change of strategy, because they feel the need to do something

tonight. We see the papers being briefed that the Afghan exit could

be speeded up. When you look at the fine print there are some pretty

weasel words about stepping back from a lead combat role. Yet we

know combat operations could continue, even beyond 2014, under

the agreement that they are trying to negotiate with President Karzai

in the background of all this turbulence at the moment. What this

could be about tomorrow is trying to look like a determined response

to some of the bad news we have had out of Afghanistan recently. To say

we are getting out as fast as we can, and make it look faster. But

logistics and other considerations mean they can't wind down much

faster. To discuss whether NATO's involvement in Afghanistan is

really making us any safer, I'm joined from Boston by Peter

Galbraith, a former diplomat, the UN's deputy ambassador to

Afghanistan, here in the studio, Lord Hutton, the former Defence

Secretary, and chair of the royal united services institute. And

Maddox, the editor Prospect Magazine.

What are we achieving being there? We have achieved a lot over the

past few years. What are we achieving now? We are giving the

Afghans the prospect of being confident and capable of looking

after their own security. Which, quite frankly, they wouldn't have

done if we weren't there. We have denied space to Al-Qaeda and their

supporters, that is a significant goal in itself. The priority now

has to be to complete the mission in a sense as Mark described it.

get out? We are getting out. We are there so we can get out? No, to do

the things I said earlier, to support the Afghans, giving them

the chance of being capable of looking after security in their own

country, which they were not capable of unless we had been

physically present. The task now, as the Prime Minister and President

have made clear, is to end combat operations over the next two years,

and I think over that period of time, lay the foundations for

giving the Afghans this concept of being confident in looking after

their own security. That is exactly what you have just said, the reason

we are there is to get out? I have not described the mission properly

then. There is a two-year training and support operation between now

and then. They can be replaced then? So the Afghans can look after

their own security, that was always the mission. There was never an

intention and plan in 2005 and beyond for us to be there forever.

The point was to support the new Government in Kabul, and give them

the means to defend themselves, so they could actually make sure that

Al-Qaeda and their supporters couldn't come back. What do you

think would happen if there were to be a change of policy, and the

Americans, predominantly the Americans and their allies, were to

decide to leave now? First, the United States and its allies would

save a lot of money, the United States spent $117 billion in

Afghanistan in 2011, and it might be able to devote more resources

where Al-Qaeda is a threat. It is not a threat in Afghanistan, but it

is a threat in Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen and among other places. What

would happen in Afghanistan? I don't think the situation in

Afghanistan would look any different. The problem in

Afghanistan is we have a counter insurgency strategy that is not

working, and cannot work, because it depends on having a reliable

partner, and the corrupt, ineffective and illegitimate

Government of Hamid Karzai is not such a partner. The strategy is

simply not working, and there is no prospect of making it work. So we

could debate whether Afghanistan is worth it. I don't think it is worth

it. Even if it were very important, we don't have a strategy that will

work. If we withdraw, the north will be still more or less

independent of the Taliban, because the Taliban is an entirely Pashtun

movement, I don't think the Taliban will take Kabul, they will continue

to control the south and east as they do now. Bronwen Maddox, from

where you sit, what has been achieved for the tens of billions

of pounds, and the 404 young lives? Not a lot, but a bit. One of those

things, as John Hutton was saying, is to get rid of Al-Qaeda more or

less from Afghanistan. One is to persuade Pakistan that it needs to

try to do something about its wild west, if you like, its wild

frontier, but not a lot. anything achieved by staying there?

I think still a bit, but not for very much longer. It would be

really those two things. Peter Galbraith marvellously describes

the Karzai Government, I think he understates the case for how bad it

is. I would guess you could say by staying there it gives it a bit

more time to try to do a deal with the Taliban and achieve a kind of

stability. It certainly gives America a bit more time to put

pressure on Pakistan. This is a terrible thing since, John Hutton,

there seems widespread consensus on the sort of Government, you may say

it is the only Government, but the sort of Government that there is in

Afghanistan at the moment now. That is not a great thing to have died

for, is it? The Afghan Government has been mired in corruption, they

have not been reliable partners for much of the time we have been

involved in this campaign. That has restricted the sort of progress we

would have liked to have made. It is a complicated operation, there

is only one Government in Afghanistan, there is no other

Government to work with, we have no choice, no option. There is still a

job to be done there, I think. I believe that very, very strongly. I

think it is right, what Peter is saying, that the terrorist threat

from Al-Qaeda and linked organisations is diverse and more

spread. If we were to rewrite history and say we shouldn't have

gone to Afghanistan, there has been no gain from that mission, I think

we really would be standing history on its head. I think there have

been tangible gains t has been an immensely comply it cad campaign to

prosecute, I don't dis-- complicated campaign to prosecute.

I don't dispute that. I don't know. When was the last Al-

Qaeda casualty? I don't know. was over a year ago. You could

argue that it has a bit, but a lot of them have been killed in the

past six months, that is not an argument for staying indefinitely.

The battle against Al-Qaeda is not just Afghanistan, we are pursuing

and apprehending Al-Qaeda suspects around the world. We have to ask if

we hadn't gone how would the world look? We mustn't Lois sight of the

9/11 context, and how the world looked then when we went into

Afghanistan. What do you think the Afghan operation has done to the

way western powers regard the rest of the world, and the way the rest

of the world regards NATO? First, the Afghan war was justified in

2001, but the mission was more or less accomplished at the end of

2001. The Taliban and Al-Qaeda were out of Afghanistan. We then changed

the mission into, and a very ambitious effort to create a

centralised Afghan Government, in a country that had never known a

centralised Government, that was one of the most diverse countries

in the world, both ethically, and geographically. We have been

investing half a trillion dollars in that effort, with no success,

for the reasons that Lord Hutton himself said. Namely, we don't have

a reliable partner, we can wish that the Karzai Government was more

reliable, but it isn't. If your strategy depends on a reliable

partner, and there isn't one, and there isn't any way to get one, it

isn't going to work. What is the largeer lesson? It is when you

engage -- larger lesson? It is when you engage in missions as in

Afghanistan and Iraq, you are undertaking something that you

probably can't accomplish. When you engage in intervention they

probably only work when you have a much more limited agenda, which is

to support the agendas of your partners on the ground. That's what

worked in Libya, Bosnia and Kosovo, to name three quite successful

cases. Bronwen Maddox what do you think is the legacy of the

operation? I think it makes NATO look like an organisation that

chooses the wrong wars to fights, that makes big misjudgments, and

now one that is much less likely to go to war at all. What do you think

has been the legacy of the Afghan war? It is too early to tell. I

think we have had some success on the ground. I think we have made a

difference in terms of protecting the UK from the threat of terrorism,

but this battle, this war against this kind of terrorism is going to

go on, it is not over yet. It won't be over when we come out of

Afghanistan either. Thank you all very much.

Don't put the kettle on, mother, come to that, don't flush the loo

more than you need to. We haven't reached the depth of drought

restrictions, but today's announcement of seven hosepipe bans,

says that unless the heavens open frequently and for long periods,

much worse is to come, and the clocks haven't even gone forward

yet. The wet weather here used to be a standing joke, but had we

Look back 40 years and things have changed a lot on some of Britain's

rivers, the ducks here in Berkshire have been wading not swimming for

weeks now, and people round here won't have been surprised by

today's hosepipe bans and predictions of further drought.

you go back 37 years it was very full. It was up to my river bank

level. So gradually, through the years, it has sort of got lower and

lower. It used to be a fishing place, and plenty of wildlife.

Water voles, greebs, we don't have those things now. Even my dog is

braving his way into it. Normally water of the River Lambourn runs

through here, it is fed chalky deposits and is fed through the

winter. After two dry winters levels are exceptionally low,

comparable with the famous drought of 1976, when water levels were the

lowest for 100 years. The situation has deteriorated nationally. That

dry summer has become the measure. Environmentalists said we could see

droughts spread to east Yorkshire and Shropshire and Somerset. The

whole of the south-east and East Anglia are already in drought.

Today's report nods to compaints that the practices of water

companies have some how made What about the next 40 years? Can

science tell us much about what the rivers may look like in the future?

Globally we are confident in terms of when it rains it will, when it

rains heavily, it will rain even more heavily, and also we are quite

confident in the already very dry regions, like the Mediterranean,

there will be a decline in the rainfall amount. But as you come to

smaller and smaller scales like say for the UK, it becomes very

dependant on very subtle shifts in the large scale atmospheric flows,

for example the jet strategy and the way it drives weather systems

across the country, are very sensitive to the natural oslaigss

that are always going on in -- osilations going on. When it comes

down to that it is difficult to make a natural projection. Those

responsible for adapt to go the changing reserves of water can look

to projections, the Government uses climate projections based on carbon

emissions and how it will affect the climate, each with confidence

levels attached. It is a complicated set of data to get to

grips w and a tricky basis on which to make policy. We are getting

there, ever more detailed climate models with all the processes of

weather and climate, how think interact and effect the hide

logical cycle. We are getting near -- hydrological cycle. We are

getting near to high resolutions of how it may change. We are not there

yet? There are things in the pipeline coming, I'm convinced in

the next five years we will be able to start providing the answers, and

directly verifiable against the measurements. We can't give a

definitive idea, we have to plan for a change in the extreme, some

heavier rainfall and years where you experience droughts. Customers

at the Swann think there is more than changing rainfall behind the

drought? They blame everything from water companies to farmers to cliel

mate change and anything else, there is always -- climate change,

and anything else. There is always a view in the pub. The ducks may

not be the only people modifying their lifestyle, we could see food

prices rise as crops are affected. If a dry spring follows a dry

winter. With us now are the shadow

Environment Secretary, and a representative from Thames Water

one of the companies to announce a man today.

Do you support the house pipe ban? We think it is important that the

Government and water Companies Act to make sure we don't have more

stringent restrictions on customers. You do support it? We do. Why are

you blaming the Government for it? We think they needing to further

and faster in affordability. Affordability is another matter?

is linked to how you invest in the water network. Driving down bad

deblt and helping people pay -- bad debt and helping people pay bills

helps in the investment for water pipes. You would say it is partly

the Government's fault we have no water? There as water bill that is

delayed, and not looked like it will be in the Queen's Speech,

where the Government could take be atruction from rivers and other

areas where they could be taking action quicker, we may have to

weight for 2014 for that. There were no rainfall variations under

Labour? There were, and we took action to drive down leak, they

have reduced by 40%, and allow people metre compulsory, 50% of

homes will be metered by 2015. were your companies' profits last -

- company's profits last year? million after tax. What do you

think of a refund on bills every time you introduce a hosepipe ban?

If we were failing, yes, we agrow levels of service. We agree in a

drought we expect one year in 20 we would need restrictions. Otherwise

we would have to invest a whole lot more to deal with a situation that

occurs rarely. There is �200 million that could be spent in

leaks? The shareholders need a return on the company or they will

invest elsewhere. That is why offwatt decides on the fair return

for a company doing an efficient job. What are they doing wrong?

think it is a question of a national framework. There is a

question within water companies for them to transfer water amongst

their own regions. Transferring water between regions ought to be

better. There is an area where the national Government needs to create

a national framework. Is that feasible? We can do more about

transferring water between companies, we need to join up the

existing bypasss between the companies better rather than a new

grid. Why haven't you done it? have done it and we can do more.

The need is to move the smallest amount of water the smallest

distance so we can cope with wherever the droubt will be. They

aren't always in the south-east, last year it was the Lake District.

The big one in 1976 was in Yorkshire, the Midlands? It was.

Beneath all of this are all sorts of assumptions about what we are

entitled to expect from water. With redeprived of anything not watering

our gardens? It is about educating people. Lifestyle means we are

running the dishwasher and washing machine more often. Do you think

people should have the freedom to pour water on the flower beds? I'm

asking you, what do you think? People who pay their water bills

have a right to expect water out of their taps. Unlimited amounts, to

do with what they please? By 2015, 50% of people will be on water

metres, when that happens people will reduce their consumption.

are in favour of metres, if they decide they are willing to pay the

cost per metre of unit water, should they be entitled to do with

it what they wish? It is a national resource and somebody pouring it on

their garden will deprive someone else in the year. So the answer is

they shouldn't? It depends on whether it rains, it is very

unpredictable. Precisely, what should they spend it on and what

should they not be allowed to spend it on? The Government needs to

educate people on how to reduce water. There is things like hippos

you can put in your cistern, flushing the loo less, but nobody

wants to go into the detailed areas, because it sounds like the nanny

state. What do you think, it is all money for you, do you think people

should be free to do what they want with water? That is what the law

says, we have a statutory duty to supply water to customers, we help

them to get free water saving equipment from the website. This is

all stuff you put in your loo and it saves water. But the profound

question, what people are entitled to expect to do with a fine night

supply? At the moment they are entitled to do whatever they want

if they are paying for it. We neat more metering so people pay for

what they use. And if they choose to chuck it on the garden it is OK?

It is education, it is the same as turning the lights off. We need to

get at it through schools, through education of customers, and works

with customers are to get the overall de --. We are working on

procedures to help people not ruin their garden in a hosepipe ban. You

can get a sprinkler at the moment that can use all the water for a

family in one hour. 47 women and children dead. The

latest apparent horror in President Assad's attempt to cow his people,

is especially distressing, many of the victims had their throats cut.

The President's mouth piece blamed unnamed terrorists for the murders.

Those Syrians hoping the rest of the world will put aside

differences and come to their Waiting For Sunrise in vain. In the

UN, prospects of new resolutions are fading as the United States and

Russia continue to disagree about the way forward.

We start now in Syria? There are accounts from several opposition

activists in Homs, as you say, of the killing of more than 40 people

last night, men, women and children, all from the same few families.

These pictures, which we can't verify, apparently show the bodies

being taken for burial. What we understand according to the

accounts, is they were taken by Government forces and then handed

over to pro-Government thugs, what this man, who says he escaped the

massacre, he says they were held in a room for more than two hours,

they were dowsed with petrol, some of them were set on fire. The

accounts do differ a bit, particularly in where exactly the

killings took place. As you say, of course, the Government is blaming

the whole massacre on the opposition, saying they filmed this

in order to discredit the Government. Now, is there any

diplomatic progress on trying to get an intervention or solution?

There was a whole special session of the United Nations Security

Council, called by Britain, and the Foreign Secretary, William Hague,

said the council had failed completely so far in its

responsibility to the Syrian people. He's talking about the failure to

agree any kind of resolution at all, condemning the violence, because of

the opposition of Russia and China. You could see that fod, because the

Russian foreign minutes -- today, because the Russian Foreign

Minister not only blamed the Government but the opposition for

the violence, he talked about Al- Qaeda extremists. Slowly, finally,

the west and Russia are beginning to come together, there may be an

agreed form of words, the difficulty now is the call to say

there should be a stop in shooting. It is symbolic to have a ref Luis,

but it won't necessarily change the situation on the ground. What about

the talk of arming the rebels? There is something interesting

today from the main opposition grouping, from the Syrian National

Council. They say the Free Syrian Army is being helped with weapons

from outside from other countries, they won't say which countries, we

think it is Saudi Arabia and Qatar which proposed this before. The

signs are it is happening slowly. The evidence on the ground suggests

the only weapons is rifles, and other light weapons, there is no

sign of anything heavier being smuggled in. It has become a very

familiar part of the story of post- war Britain, unique collections of

art amassed at the height of the country's prosperity, sold to make

good the consequences of industrial yoisation. There is a museum

established by Waterford Wedgwood potry, which a court has ruled can

be sold off in -- Wedgwood pottery, which a court ruled can be sold off.

To lose a collection of this magnitude is unthinkable.

I think it is heart-breaking. There will be lots of other museums

and collections that could equally be caught by the same unfortunate

This award-winning museum houses the Wedgwood collection, one of

Britain's 20 most important cultural assets. But don't take our

word for it, that is what UNESCO calls it.

Including works by Stubbs and Reynolds, the collection is

conservatively valued at �18 million. It is a unique record of

what was virtually our first manufacturing industry. Begun three

centuries ago by Josiah Wedgwood. This is one of his failures, it

must have been heart-breaking when he opened the kiln, to find it had

bubbled, blistered, and everything had gone wrong with it. But never

mind the odd flawed vase, the whole job lot is 0 set to be broken up

and sold off to plug a black hole in Wedgwood's pension fund.

museum's specialist it is a nightmare. Inevitably as a curator

you look after the possessions for the nation. We believed this

collection was safe and in trust, it was a horrible shock to all of

us when we heard the judgment. If you broke up that absolutely

unbelievable archive and objects, it would never be replaced anywhere

in the world. These were the villages, under the

folds was clay, and under that coal. How did it come to this? The

Wedgwood collection is the product of an industry that once employed

thousands. This area of the country became known throughout the world

for what it made, the Potteries. is difficult for us to imagine the

craze that went into the collecting and purchasing of pottery in the

late 1700s. It was almost at epidemic proportions, it was a

frenzy, not unlike the launch of an iPhone today. Some of the

techniques used at Wedgwood are unchanged since Josiah's time. But

the business has endured rockier fortunes, coming close to closure.

Workers are worried about what they will have to live on in retirement,

the Wedgwood pot badly needs topping up. How will you be fixed

in terms of pension and so on? I don't really know, it is going

through a bad phase at the moment. But you are signed up to the

Wedgwood scheme? Yeah. I just hope the Government takes it on. There

are people here quite worried about their pensions, aren't there?

are, yes, unfortunately it looked like the museum has taken the brunt

of it. What do you make of that? Very sad, that is our history.

A court ruled the Wedgwood collection, housed at the museum

was an asset of the potteryp can, so it could be sold off to help

meet the pensions' shortfall. It is the law of unintended

consequences. I think following the very high-profile failures of a

number of pension schemes, from Maxwell on wards, you can

understand why the Government felled compelled to introduce

legislation to protect pensioners. Under what is called "the last man

standing" rule, we had a solvent company left standing, and the only

way that the pensioners could get the benefit from the Pension

Protection Fund, of 90% of their pay, their pensions, was for this

company to be put into some form of insolvency. The Wedgwood collection

is terrific, and the museum itself is a nice day out. Does any of it

amount to much more than a storm in a potteries tea cup? Yes it does,

those grappling with the pensions' black hole, say many other

companies up and down the country, could tensionly be affected. And

minsters are alarmed. I'm sure there will be implications for

others. That is why the Attorney General is looking at this so

closely. The Wedgwood museum story is a tragedy in itself. But there

will be lots of other museums and similar institutions and

collections that could equally be caught by the same unfortunate

rules. The Attorney General will decide

next month whether to approve the sale of the Wedgwood collection.

Newsnight understands ministers and arts bodies are urgently seeking

funds to save it for the nation. To prevent what many would see as

flogging off the family China. With us now in the stud yoi is the

historian Tristram Hunt, the Culture Minister, vase vase vase,

and the Queen of polka dot pottery, Emma Bridgewater.

It is not as if anyone will take a sledgehammer to the pieces, they

will be dispersed? It will be right across the world. They could go to

Moscow, Dubai, Alabama, and actually what we want is for them

to be in Staffordshire. They are part of the history and identity of

the potteries of Stoke-on-Trent, of north Staffordshire. To lose these,

and this is a museum of international significance, telling

the store, not just of the ceramic industry, but through Wedgwood the

story of the Industrial Revolution, the French revolution, it is part

of the national heritage. How big a deal do you think it is, Emma

Bridgewater? I think it is a very big deal, Stoke really needs for

that collection to stay nearby. it doesn't? Well some hardy souls

make their way to Stoke, we want more visitor numbers. It is clearly

a very, very important bit of the offering. There

Vase vase vase, how will you save it -- Ed Vaizey, how will you save

it? I don't think it is about to be sold off and flogged abroad. We are

talking to the Pension Protection Fund, which technically now owns

the collection and is an asset of that fund. They don't want to flog

it off, we are talking to the administration, he doesn't want to

flog it off. We are talking to the company that owns the land where

the museum is, they are not going to do something. Nobody will nip

down to Sothebys, here is a load of Wedgwood we will sell. We are

talking, what we need to do is find out whether the Attorney General

will appeal, that is a decision he has to make independently, once we

know the position, whether an appeal or the proceedings are

concluded. Let's say the collection is still liable for the pension, we

need to work oit how much it is worth, agree a price, and -- work

out how much it is worth and agree a price and save the collection.

I'm absolutely confident the collection will be saved, by

combination of public money, lottery money and the public's

money, I think they will contribute to save this collection. You won't

go any further than that? I don't. Let's talk about why Wedgwood

himself and why that particular company is so significant, and what

the fate of the company tells us about the state of British

manufacturing generally. What was it that was so significant about

Wedgwood's operation? I think the analogy with the iPhone was very

good. Josiah Wedgwood was the Steve Jobs figure, he combined technical

ingenuity, with excellent marketing capacity. He grew this entire

market, he developed this middle- class enthusiasm for ceramics, not

just in Britain. I know you are a scolar of empire, Jeremy, and you

can trace the growth of ceramics and the Bombay houses in Beacon

Hill in Boston, Wedgwood sends Staffordshire around the world. He

makes the brand made in Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent, a

global brand, continued up to today. There is no doubt that the last 20,

30 years has been a massive crisis in the ceramics industry, we have

lost 80% of jobs since the early 1980. As a fellow professional,

what does Wedgwood mean to you? is a huge inspiration, I mean

Josiah Wedgwood, the first, this have been some good peoples since,

but he's a towering figure, an inspiration in design and business.

I use that collection, over the years, I have been to visit it a

lot, and drawn specific ideas from T --. What sort of ideas?

creamwear he developed in the early 19th century, is beautiful, the

frog dinner service for Catherine The Great. He was an incredible man.

What lessons do you draw from what became of the Wedgwood enterprise,

about British manufacturing and British Industry in general?

think British manufacturing ebbs and flows, I think we are doing

rather well now in manufacturing, we are also doing rather well in of

the cas. Crafts are returning -- crafts, and crafts are returning to

this, manufacturing is returning to the country. We have as a nation

got used to saying we are losing the heritage, but I think it is

coming back in a significant way. You are an example in that, before

we get ahead of ourselves, what went wrong? It began with the Clone

Air Act, that cloned up the air of Stoke-on-Trent, it hit the ceramics

industry very hard. The big companies came and became too big

and soaked up the smaller ecosystem. They became arrogant and then we

had globalisation. How do you compete against low labour and

energy costs in China, Indonesia and a lot of companies in

Staffordshire outsourced, those that did, failed. Those that stuck

in Stoke-on-Trent, Churchill and others, they succeeded because they

invested in plant and kit and they looked to the skills of the

potteries. They are the ones putting back on jobs. The ones that

went abror, and Wedgwood was part of that, lost out. If you produce

in Indonesia, it is not a strong brand, if you produce in Stoke-on-

Trent it is an A1 brand. So Spod has just come back to -- Spode has

just come back because people are asking for it. I think more and

more people are recognising it, particularly in this area. I don't

want to in any way tread on your toes or understatement your

significance, Emma Bridgewater, it is a much smaller operation than

previous operation. We employed 200 people in Stoke, and turn over �14

million. Let's hear it for SMEs, we are likely to create jobs, right

now. What is the realisation that someone like you came to that a big

organisation, where I started outsourcing all over the world,

failed to spot? Manufacturing is very preoccupying, what we have

always done, I didn't come from the area or the industry. I suddenly

could see the market was looking one way and the industry the other.

We have kept our commercial office outside stoke. I think the

important thing is that you remain absolutely clear about your

customer and what they want. why you are making it? What they

want is a properly made product, until recently they weren't

interested in made in England, suddenly, in the last two or three

years it is gaining. That is about authenticity, people know when you

turn over the cup and saucer, if it says made in England, not designed,

or just "England", it is made in Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire

and it will last. The museum and collection in it is part of the

story, it is an inspiration not just for designers but businesses

as well. Ed Vaizey you has given an undertaking that the business

collective will be preserved. You are opening a big door to all sort

of other people saying, you better do the same for us? I will work as

hard as I can to keep the collection here, it is unique and

part of our heritage, it is a national and internationally

significant. I don't think that the door to everyone for saying look at

my collection. We have a God history in this country of ensuring

that works of exceptional importance are saved for the nation.

We have saved the two Titians, part of the national galleries and

galleries of Scotland. We used lottery money, and the money saved

by galleries. Tomorrow morning's front pages, the

Guardian has news there will be a slight tweaking to the way British

troops are deployed in Afghanistan. The Guardian says GPs are end sping

as little as a day a week for seeing patients because they are

setting up the reorganisation. The Times has also news to a slight

change to the way troops are used in Afghanistan.

An exhibition has opened in Brighton commemorating a death of a