26/06/2012 Newsnight


Why the latest budget U-turn? Does Northern Ireland like the Queen any more now than 35 years ago. And should hackers be employed by MI5? With Jeremy Paxman.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 26/06/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



That tax rise, the Chancellor told us, was essential to getting the


economy back on track, it wasn't, it is not going to happen, not


necessary, apparently. The latest Budget Day backpeddling is on fuel


duty. Is this because the Government realised it couldn't get


away with it, or is it also in a bit of a panic about the figures.


Will it be health, education or defence to make up the half a


billion hole they just blew in the Government's finances.


No doubt the Treasury Minister, Chloe Smith, will be able to


enlighten us all. When the Queen visited Northern


Ireland on her silver Julilee, At the height of the Troubles, it


provoked this kind of thing. Is that generation of Republicans any


more pleased to see her now. If you got to meet the Queen, what


would you say to her? I wouldn't say anything, I wouldn't waste my


breath on her. And this. Hello citizens of the


world, we are anonymous. It is not just them, MI5 warns of


increasingly sophisticated and frequent attacks from all over


cyberspace. Who is behind it? What do they want? And how can we


protect ourselves. I'm joined by the 19-year-old who has won the


country's biggest cyber security challenge.


Our masterly, compassionate and thoughtful Chancellor of the


Exchequer has felt the pain of the British people and decided to


abandon his plans to raise the tax on fuel this summer, either that or


we are looking at the budget omnishambles number six or seven.


Last week the fuel rise was essential, this week, unnecessarily.


The minister said it would cost �1.5 billion to scrap the rise,


today the Treasury said it would cost only half a billion. Either


the Government is playing politics with the national economy, or the


economy is in such an appallingly chaotic state, it justifies panic


reactions like this. Our Economics Editor, Paul Mason, is here.


It is a good economy that whether or not this is part of a master


plan to save the British economy from doom, or it is something they


thought up this morning. We are told the cabinet met this morning


and didn't discuss any changes to the fuel duty rise. And then, at


12.30, Conservative MPs were sent something called a lines to take,


this is what MPs get sent from all parties, to tell them what to say.


They were told that the demand for the freeze, Labour's calls were


hypocrisy of the worst kind, then it came that the Government enact


add freeze on the duty. And it will cost, as they say, �550 billion to


do that. Unusually, this is not something balanced by an immediate


change in spending or tax elsewhere. It is something actually we don't


know how it will be paid for. If we were in an election we would hear


the Government being accused of an uncosted tax move. It is all to


play for. We might find out what is the situation soon. These U-turns


are coming thick and fast. To those waiting with bathed breath


for that favourite media catch phrase, "the U-turn", I have only


one thing to say, you turn if you want to! Actually, George Osborne


is for turning. Since the budget, he's U-turned on the pasty tax, the


caravan tax, the charities' tax, and today it was a planned tax on


petrol, fuel duty. I can tell people we will now stop any rise in


fuel duty this August, and freeze it for the rest of the year. This


means that fuel duty will be 10p a litre lower than plans by the last


Labour Government. The move came as Labour, the SNP and Plaid Cymru


were forcing a vote on the planned increase. It left the Shadow


Chancellor, not for the first time, performing the political equivalent


of a victory roll. We have now had a U-turn on pasties, caravans,


skips, churches, and now today a U- turn on fuel, which we welcome.


Though today's move follow as campaign by the Sun Newspaper, and


Tory backbenchers, there is more to this than populisim. Last week the


Government pumped �80 billion into the banks significant tem, and


there could be another �50 billion of money printing on the way. It


looks like there is a stimulus, and this bit, definitely is, fiscal.


The reason for that is clear, the Governor of the Bank of England


ripped up a forecast he made six months ago today, and went into his


full doomsayier act. We are in the middle of a deep crisis, with


enormous challenges to put our own banking system right, and


challenges from the rest of the world that they too are struggling


with. Sir Mervyn said he had no idea what is about to happen in the


your stkron, and predicting a return to -- in the eurozone, and


predicting a return to normality in Britain would be stab in the dark.


When they started most people, including ourselves, still didn't


believe we would be right in the middle and the thick of it five


years later. All the way through I said to this committee, I don't


think yet think we are half way through. That I have always said


that, and I'm still saying T that tells you a lot about how my


estimate how long this will go on for is expanding with time. With


the eurozone in recession, and a sense of crisis in Berlin, there is


a nightmare scenario, where the export market collapses, and the


growth slows here, and it goes off course. The tax yield this year is


lower than expected and the deficit higher already this year. Right now


George Osborne's credibility is a precious commodity. Billions upon


billions of pounds are riding on the fact that we have a Chancellor


that says what he means and means what he says. It doesn't help one


little bit for him to keep making U-turn after U-turn after U-turn on


this budget. U-turns don't seem to stop, we have had a month of them


now. Ultimately, this will undermine Osborne's credibility.


money terms, today's U-turn is bigger d in money terms, today's U-


turn is bigger than all the rest. It is �550 billion, and made up of


departmental spending cuts, education, health, who knows, it


won't be announced until November. The danger for Osborne is not


primarily that he looks weak and decisive, but on the big issue, the


deficit, he's sticking to Plan A. It is just when you launch and


cancel tax increase, at a rate of one a week, you can begin to look


incompetent. This is a followership, rather than leadership. They


basically came up with a plan, and if people didn't like it they came


up with another one. You can argue it is a great modern way of


governing with opinion polling and decision making, or you can argue


it is indecisive and undermining George Osborne's own judgment. If


he says he's going to do something, there is a lot of money now riding


on he's going to do it. Meanwhile drivers, pasty eerts, caravan


owners and chuggers unite, right now it feels like every day is


Budget Day. Chloe Smith, the Treasury Minister,


is here with us, when were you told of the change of plan? As a


minister in the Treasury, and dealing with fuel matters, this has


been under consideration for some time. When was the decision taken?


As I say, it has been under consideration for some time. When


was the decision taken? The Prime Minister and the Chancellor take


these decisions between them. were you told then? I have been


involved in this for some time. didn't take the decision, you say


the Chancellor and the Prime Minister did, when were you told?


We had a collective discussion of that in due course, and although I


can't give you the full glory details. Did you -- did it happen


today? I can't tell you the ins and the outs. Why isn't it appropriate?


You are coming here to defend a changele policy, and you can't even


tell me when you were told the change of policy was? As a minister


in the Treasury I have been involved in the discussions for


some time. As I said to you, the Prime Minister and the Chancellor


talk those decision, I can't give awe running commentry on who said


what. I'm not asking for that, I'm asking for the statement of fact of


when you were told, you were told some time today, clearly, was it


before or after lunch? I'm not going to give you a commentry on


who says what and when. I just want to know when were you told what the


change of policy was? This has been under discussion for some weeks.


And at some point during those several weeks, they communicated to


you that there had been a decision to change the policy? Indeed, and


today in front of parliament we revealed to parliament, as is right


and proper, to parliament, that we were planning to help households


and businesss in this way. Is it hard for you to defend a policy you


don't agree with? It is not that injure me nice question, I do agree


with it. You didn't in May? Go on. In May you said, it was not certain


that cutting fuel duty would have a positive effect on families or


businesses so, what's happened? think the point to be made out of


that, and out of what has then been said today, is it is important to


do what you think you can to help households and businesses in a


world we are facing, I this think your introduction pulled some of


those themes out N a world we are facing which is very hard for


households and businesses, you have to do what you can and in good


faith so, they can get the help they need in hard times. You said


it wasn't certain that cutting fuel duty would have a positive effect


on families and businesses, that was on the 23rd of May, what has


happened between then and now, the 25th of June? I don't think many


things are certain in this world. There are a lot of uncertainties


here? Families or businesses could save the money saved on the fuel


duty, there is lots of ways it could pan out for them. Why didn't


the Government only know about it yesterday? It is very important


that the Government acts on concerns it hears. As I said about


who, what and when, the Government will make its policy, and


importantly comes to parliament with it. Isn't the cost petrol in


people's cars a matter of legitimate interest to the


Transport Secretary, who didn't know yesterday? Of course it is


matter of legitimate interests to households and businesses. As you


know taxes or the Chancellor, and in this case, the Chancellor and


the Prime Minister took the decision. It is going to cost you


say now, about �550 million, in contrast with your figure on the


2rd of May, which was about �1.5 billion. You just got the sums


wrong, did you? They refer to two slightly different things. The


question being asked in May, I believe, was about a full


cancellation, and of course, as you will be aware from today, we have


been talking of deferring the cough rise to January, the two are


different -- the rise to January. The two are different. You say it


is now �550 million, can you tell us from which departments that gap


will be made up? It will be made up, it will be drawn from, and around


�500 million is the correct figure, because we are talking about a


deferral. It will be drawn from underspending in departmental


budgets. Where? There are a number of those available. We know for


example, this year, if you look at the public sector data relosed only


today, we know that under-- released only today, we know that


the rate of spending is less than the OBR was forecast. Those figures


are there today. Where? Last year there were �4 mill billion of those.


Which department will it come from? They fall across in different ways.


That figure will progress in the year. Name a few departments?


won't do, that we will give the full details soon. Are you waiting


to be told that as well? No. know do you, you know which


departments have underspent (it is not possible to give awe full


breakdown Undersuspect? It is not possible to give a fall -- under


spent? It is not possible to give a full figure there? It is not


possible at the moment to do that. Presumably you know which


departments but are choosing not to? It is an aggregate figure.


are choosing not to tell us which Government departments have


underspent? It is an aggregate figure, that is what is important.


The figure says there is enough underspend to do this. When we see


that kind of funding available, we want it for the good of households


and businesses. Can you confirm to us that the number one priority of


your Government is reducing the deficit? It is indeed. That is the


number one priority? The fact of using underspends for this, means


our plan is absolutely intact, that is rightly what we seek to use for


the credibility of our fiscal plan. Is this some sort of joke. How can


you possibly have as a number one priority cutting the deficit, when


you choose to spend and underspend in funding a tax cut o failure to


implement a tax rise, which was -- or failure to implement a tax rise,


which was on schedule? The plan overall has not changed, it remains


the departmental budgets as laid out. We are look to go uets


underspends in a way that is -- to use the underspends in a way that


is valuable, and anyone who drives a car knows that. We heard today


that Government borrowing increased by �3 billion in may? Do you want


me to answer that or are you finishing the sentence.


wondering why you didn't use the money to pay that down? The figures


on the other side of that public sector data released today, are


interesting in themselves, they relate to one-off factors,


specifically in when payments were made in May and June. That is


interesting in a different conversation. The fact is here we


are sticking to the overall plan and taking the opportunities we


have to help households and businesses. Do you ever wake up in


the morning and think, my God, what will I be told today? I wake up in


the morning and know that some of my constituents will really value


not having to pay that little bit more on fuel price, come August,


because the cost of living is pretty tight at the moment,


everybody does know. That I think this move today is valuable. It is


not just a Westminster village story, it is real money in real


people's pockets. We all understand that? Good. Do you ever think you


are incompetent? I think it is valuable to help real people in


this way, I do think that is valued by people who drive.


Thank you. Later in the programme, Paul Mason


will be back to explain why the European Prime Minister is


threatening to make Angela Merkel an offer she can't refuse. Tomorrow


the Queen will meet amicablely with Martin McGuiness, a former member


of the organisation that killed her cousin, Lord Mountbatten. The Queen


drew crowds today. It is a real testament to how things have


changed in that corner of the kingdom. Peter Taylor reported


throughout the Troubles in Northern Ireland, including a response to


the Queen that was quite different. The Queen set foot in a Northern


Ireland that was a world away from the troubled province she visited


35 years ago, on her Silver Jubilee. Back then, in 1977, I made this


controversial film about the Queen's tour, which took place


through one of the most violent periods of the conflict. In this


improving atmosphere, those with different beliefs and aspirations,


understand that if this community is to survive and prosper, they


must live and work together in friendship and forgiveness.


It was due to be shown in peak time, on the last day of her visit. Then,


ten minutes before it was due to go on air, ITV's regulators stopped


the film's transmission. It later trickled out over the network in a


late night slot. The ostensable reason for stopping


the film was a legal problem over the inflammatory words spoken by a


militant Republican, we weren't allowed to hear his voice. But I


have always believed the real reason for stopping the film, was


because its message was in direct conflict of the spin that the then


Labour Government of the day wanted to place on the visit. Ministers


wanted to present the Queen as the great healer of the division


between the two communities. Historically she was symbolic of


the division itself. I saw how the visit highlighted the


bitter empty between loyalists and republicans. There was to be no


healing here. Which don't accept a British Queen, we never will accept


a British Queen. We don't want her here at all. She is not our Queen.


The second day of the visit, just before the royal helicopter was due


to land...In 1977, security was so precare yu, that Her Majesty wasn't


allowed to spend -- precarious, that Her Majesty wasn't allowed to


spend a night in the province. She was helicoptered in, having spent a


night offshore. Cheer was was from a carefully selected crowd. While


the Queen was being welcomed at Hillsborough, the Provisional IRA


mounted a roadblock in an estate a few miles away. We were told


earlier in the day a snub to the Queen was planned. This was it,


more propaganda than military exercise. Perhaps more our benefit


or a morale booster for supporters. It lasted more than five minutes,


but within half a mile of an army post out of sight. 3,000 supporter


of the IRA hailed "Queen Elizabeth of death" down the road.


organised a march to show she had no support in this area of Belfast.


We weren't allowed in the city centre, the march was banned.


After the preliminary skirmish, battle commenced. The army snap


squad tries to outflank the rioters, but is driven back. This is the


ugly face of Ulster. This is the In 1977, the unionist politician,


John Taylor, told me the IRA was on the run. Five years earlier he had


been machine gunned by the official IRA.


How do Protestants regard the Queen's visit? They were delighted


she has come, for several years they were complaining that there


appeared to be little interest by the Royal Family and the problems


we were having in Northern Ireland. They are thrilled. It comes when


changes are taking place in Northern Ireland, and it does


appear that the IRA are in retreat. John Taylor's predictions proved


premature, two years later the IRA murdered the Queen's cousin, Lord


Mountbatten, when they blew up his boat. A bomb also killed two family


relatives and a member of the crew. The IRA followed up the attack by


killing 18 soldiers on the same day, in a double bombing at Warren Point.


It was to be almost another 20 bloody years before the IRA ended


its campaign, and Sinn Fein finally signed up to the Good Friday


Agreement. I reminded John Taylor, now Lord Killcluney, of what he


told me all those years ago. Why did you say that? Morale was under


attack, by the British majority in Northern Ireland, they had attacks


from the terrorist organisations, likewise the nationalist community


was increasing in numbers, so politically the British majority


were under attack. And there was a suspicion that the English, Tory


and Labour, could not be relied upon. So the fact that Her Majesty


was coming was great for morale amongst the British majority in


Northern Ireland. In 1977, I filmed the funeral of


Paul McWilliams, an IRA teenager who had been shot by the army. I


interviewed some of the women who had followed his coffin. We don't


regard ourselves as British subjects, we are not British


subjects. Do you think she's not a brave lady for coming to Belfast?


No, I class her any braver than I, I think I'm braver than her, I have


to live here, while the British soldiers are on about shooting


people down. No I wouldn't give her any medals for coming over to


Northern Ireland. I finally tracked down Eileen Shaw,


and replayed the interview I did with her in 1977. Have you changed


your views now, given that the Queen is about to come to Belfast


again? No. In fact it has got stronger. I'm getting older,


nothing's changed. The Queen is the figurehead of repression. Strip-


searches and the condition of iconic republican prisoners like


Marian Price, are among the issues that fuel dissidents' anger. If you


got to meet the Queen what would you say to her? I wouldn't waste my


breath on her. The arrival of the Queen and her


Silver Jubilee visit, was cause for great celebrations in the back


streets of the loyalist Shankill road. I have watched every news


bulletin, read all the papers, we are proud to be British and proud


to have her as our Queen. Helen Greg died some time ago, I visited


the Shankill women's centre to see if royal fervour was as strong as


ever. When I showed them the film, it was no surprised that it proved


undiminished. But, unable to get one of the


10,000 free tickets for the royal garden party tomorrow, they had at


least won a cow in a charity competition, and will decorate it


in Jubilee colours. I just love the Queen. I love all the Royal Family.


I'm glad to see she's coming here. But will will loyalist war drums


fall silent when Martin McGuiness shakes the hand of the Queen


tomorrow. I would be very pleased to see him do that. It would mean


the world to me, so it would. It would mean the world to a lot of


people. Because the IRA murdered her cousin, Lord Mountbatten,


shaking hands may be difficult for the Queen too. Yes, I think it


would be a major ask on the Queen's part as well. And this is maybe


massive one for the Queen to take. But it will certainly send out a


strong and clear message to the people of Northern Ireland. But the


Queen would shake his hand, I have no doubt whatsoever. Because of the


lady that she is, she will do this. Today, the dark clouds of 1977 seem


a million miles away. Private Harrison was the 270th soldier to


die in Northern Ireland. Another 233 were to follow, before peace


finally came. When Martin McGuiness shakes the Queen's hand tomorrow,


it will be a historic event of enormous significance for both


communities. Do you hope Mr McGuiness shakes Her Majesty's


hand? I would hope so. I have never shaken his hand, I'm a politician,


and I feel more hesitant about shaking the hands of IRA people,


especially since I got ten bullets through my head at one time. Do you


think Martin McGuiness should shake the Queen's hand? As a republican I


have no objections in Martin McGuiness, as a joint First


Minister, he also has to remember he's representing all of the


community, and not just our republicanism.


But, not all sections of the republican community are prepared


to welcome the Queen. Last Saturday, dissidents made it abundantly clear


that the Queen was an unwelcome foreign visitor.


If Martin McGuiness were to meet the Queen, and shake her hand, what


would your reaction be? My reaction would be Martin, wake up and smell


the coffee, you're telling us your republican, you told those lads


years and years ago, you don't recognise the court, you don't


recognise the Queen, and a lot of people dead, young lads, mothers


sitting like me, probably, sitting crying thinking about their


children, and he's going to shake the hand of the woman who put them


there. On his head be it, if he calls himself a republican, God


help Ireland. The attitude of many republicans towards the Queen began


to change when she visited Dublin last year. And laid a wreath at the


memorial to those who died fighting for Irish independence. What I


actually was impressed at her going to the Garden of Remembrance, in


that circumstance, it did have a healing effect, unlike, in complete


contrast to 1977, where it was viewed as triumphalist, and we were


still being driven into the ground. I look forward to the day when we


may return to enjoy, with the people of Northern Ireland, some of


the better and happier times, so long awaited, and so richly


deserved. When Martin McGuiness shakes the


Queen's hand tomorrow, it may suggest that day has finally come.


To explore the significance of this meeting are the author and film


maker, Kevin Toulise, who has written one of the most detailed


accounts of the IRA. And joined by former prisoner and hunger striker


Tommy Mckeany. What harm is there in a handshake? Ultimately you


could say there is no harm in it. But it is political theatre, and a


symbolism that has little meaning overall. And ultimately, I think


what is happening here is this is displaysing the need for real


politics in Northern Ireland, to examine the real issues that are


dividing us. The lack of employment, the coming of austerity that has


been produced by London. Those are the real issues that need to be


addressed, that will ultimately bring this community together. This


type of gesture politics, we have had 10, 15 years of gesture,


symbolism, we are weighed down with symbolism. What we need now is real


politics, we need to be mature enough to sit down and look at what


is happening. Instead of being presented with one more gesture,


this type of theatrical operation that is going to take place


tomorrow, that won't really address the issues in the slightest. Why is


he doing this tomorrow? I think it is a good question. You have to


think of what are the republicans seeking to get out of it. I think


it is part of their political strategy geared towards the sou.


They want to represent themselves, not as the churlish, childish


protest, who protested against the Queen last year, but as a future,


potential Government. A mature statesmanlike party. Doesn't it


recognise the institutionalising of the border? I think you have to


remember that republicans would move to the right, to the left,


they would sup with the devil himself, if they thought that was a


means of getting the Brits out of Ireland. And in this case, Martin


McGuiness is perfectly prepared to shake the hand of the living symbol


of all that he has opposed in his life. They are still intent on


coming to power in Ireland. What do you make of that, as an approach?


mean, I can see some logic in what Kevin is saying, it is quite


possible that this is really viewed by Sinn Fein as something that will


enhance their position in the Republic of Ireland. It would be


doing at the cost, I would argue, to progress here in Northern


Ireland. That's ultimately that there is a serious question mark


hanging over the validity and value of this meeting which is what is


ultimately the institution that is the British monarchy. An


institution that is redolent of hereditary power and privilege, not


something that will address the problems we are faced with. The


whole idea of the Monarch coming here, in terms of the unqualified


support, for example, that the monarchy heralds for the British


military establishment, with all the destructiveness that brings


internationally not just in Ireland. It is a means to answered, he


saying, a means to answered, that's all? I don't believe it is a means


to an end. I think there are certain flaws in the reading of


this situation, that it undermines what is a very legitimate


republican position, a democratic republican position. Not just an


Irish republican position, but republicans internationally have a


grave ves vaigs s about -- grave reservations about the hereditary


monarchy. That is another point and can be argued over any country on


earth. But in this particular context of Irish republicanism,


where do you judge majority opinion lies? In terms of the south, or?


terms of the north? I think really that Sinn Fein have almost mined


out the north. They have won as much political support as they are


likely to achieve, and their depol is the south. Gerry Adams is --


their goal is the south. Gerry Adams is a rising political figure,


they have moved very quickly in terms of number two in polls of the


political parties. The plan, really, is that in 2016, the 100th


anniversary of the Easter Rising, a man will come down the steps of the


GPO, he will stand on the steps and read the Easter proclamation, and


Gerry Adams want s to be that man. He will be the leader of 26


counties and not 32? He will be the party in the north as well. It is a


way of dissolving the border. If he can't change the constitution by


bombs and bullets, or change the political process in Ireland, it


will be through this device. I don't think anyone should fool


themselves that the goal of Sinn Fein, Gerry Adams and Martin


McGuiness s to get a united Ireland, by hook or by crook, and get the


Brits out. That is what they are there for. That is your objective


too, isn't it? It is my objective, but it is also a democratic and


socialist Republic is my objective. My concern with Sinn Fein and the


Republic is, is they are moving towards the centre. That their


politics will no longer be able to address the very real issues that


are facing us. The issues I referred to at the outset. The real


issues relating to Ireland are not relating to the monarchy and the


royals, it is to the financial disaster coming to us, not just in


Ireland, but right across Europe. Those are issues that will get


worse and worse, we have to have an answer to that. Not through this


type of symbolism, and Sinn Fein's move to the centre, Sinn Fein's


move possibly to the right, will not bring with it the message and


the means to address those issues, and Sinn Fein may not actually move


in that position that Kevin is outlining. What Kevin is outlining


is very close to the argument being made within Sinn Fein for moving in


the direction that they are moving now. I think time will prove that


this is a mistake. Thank you very much indeed.


Now, if there ever was a time when MI5 officers wore trenchcoats and


brimed hats, it is long gone. The head of the agency has disclosed


that businesses in this country are under sustained attack by cyber


warriors, it is investigating attack ones large companies, who


the companies are he didn't say nor the companies behind them. It is


computer maths and algorithms are much more use now than dead


letterboxes and invisible ink. The group that calls itself Anonymous,


claims "credit", if that is the word, for attacks on the systems in


the Vatican, Interpol and the Chinese Government, and earlier


this year, the Home Office. Butt the real scale of cybercrime is


much more extensive and shadowy. From credit card fraud to loss of


business, the cost of tacking is enormous. �800 million for just one


firm, according to the MI5 boss. Evidence of state-sponsored hacking


for political purposes is growing. The computer virus, Stucksnet is


now the to have been cooked up by the US or Israeli states, to


undermine the Iranian systems. Whatever they did is open up panned


Dora's box, they allowed the tacking community and others to


peer into a world of developing cyber weapons. How to tackle it,


the British head of cyber-security said the answer lies in getting


cybersophisticates to work for the good eulogise. GCHQs is one of the


sponsors of a yearly competition to encourage cyber-talent. In the face


of daily takes on Government systems, could that be enough.


19-year-old Jonathan won this year's cyber-security competition.


James is a veteran of cyber-defence and in Edinburgh we have our guest


with lofts contact with our anonymous hackers, in the course of


writing book on the subject. Let's analyse what the problem is?


have three major areas, firstly, massive number of new computer


viruses out there, designed to steal money from the public,


listeners of this show. Secondly, a rise in be habgtvavisim, breaking


into system, brandishing with tags and raising awareness. Thirdly, the


increasing sack racial of state- sponsored malware attacks to steal


military secrets or other information. You believe all three


are these are real threats? three of these are very real


threats. In terms of national security? Absolutely. The grandma


jort lie in the first category -- grand majority lie in the first


category, all about stealing money. How might a cyber-attack work?


There is lots of ways. The most common is you would visit a website


on your computer, because you are not patched and up-to-date, in the


background the guys in the background are able to load a vie


Russian without your permission, they will have a camera looking at


what is going on, if you access your bank they will be able to get


on and do that. If you have links with the group Anonymous, let's not


get into the details of what they are said or said not to have done.


What is the motivation for a group like that? There is a wide range of


motivations. For one thing it isn't strictly a group, it is more of a


process, and a culture of people, and an ever-shifting crowd of


people on-line. You have people people, if you were going to divide


it into two catches, there are people who want to disrupt on-line


data for fun and pranks. And those with a more sociopolitical activist


message. One thing I would say is one of the reasons we are seeing a


growth in this kind of if he Nomura, is the art of hacking and


distrupting on-line data is becoming -- disrupting on lion data


is becoming easier. You have web tools freely available on-line,


that anyone can download, that automate a cyber attack. The people


part of Anonymous, are not superskilled hackers, but people


who have grown up in internet culture, they are internet savvy,


they understand how to get things done through social networks. This


is one reason why traditional institutions like MI5, and other


authorities, find it really hard to wrap their heads round how these


guys work. As well as what they are doing effectively on-line, they are


organising themselves so quickly and so openly. One can understand,


I think, from the point of view of a subversive young person, the


thrill of trying to get into something, where is the thrill in


trying to stop somebody doing that? Well, I would say that to properly


be able to defend a system from being subverted, you very much need


to understand in what ways it is going to be subverted. Which means


that you need to look at the system that is you are trying to defend,


and try to think, what line of attack would I take would, that


work. It is not hacking, as such, as it is not actually, it is


obviously not breaking anybody else's system. It is looking into


your own, and very much focusing on patching up the holes. It is


equally rewarding, because you are still, essentially, looking at it,


finding the challenge and trying to break things. You obviously don't


face the risk of going to jail? That is a major bonus. In other


words, you are not -- on the other hand you are not as school as the


hacker? Arguably, but if you are not in jail, you are a step ahead


of them! There is a lot of people in the security industry, that I


talk to, who got into security through very ease sow terrik roots,


not as direct as Jonathan has had the opportunity. They have these


altruistic motivations, want to go stop their friends and family being


hacked on-line. It is an interesting vein going through T


but applying the skills without going to jail is a big perk.


Let's explore the question, the head of MI5 was talking about how


you go about acquiring an army of cyberwarriors to defend yourself,


where do you find them? That is the huge challenge, organisations


aren't finding them through the direct hiring roots. It is finding


people with a certain way of thinking, it is not about a certain


set of qualifications you can look up on a CV. You have to go to


different forums and exchanges. Looking at different technologies


we were talking about, and pose challenges that appeal to their


intellect. Jonathan didn't know he wanted to be in cyber-security, we


had to find a way of getting him interested without him coming to us.


What is your thought about where you find this army of cyber-


sophisticated, who are capable of withstanding the risk posed either


by criminal organisations or indeed foreign Governments? I think they


are everywhere. They will be mostly young people. We're looking at a


generation now that are growing up with the Internet. People who have


known it all their lives. Many, many more young people know how to


programme and code. I think it is a matter of going on-line to find


them. Going to different forums. One of the reasons why many people


find Anonymous attractive, is people who tend to be most


passionate about it tend to be drifting a little bit. They find it


community and purpose, they latch on to it. That is very attractive


for people. If something like that can be offered as well as engagment,


it is a matter of attracting these people in that way. What do you


make of it? I very much would say that you do need to find the


alternative roots through the cyber-security challenge. Really


attract them through ways that very much engage them. Much more than,


as James was saying, looking for the qualifications so much. It is


very much about the apt tued, looking for a way of -- aptitude,


looking for a way of thinking. sense of belonging? You don't need


to be in illegal group to long. There is the good and bad, and you


belong to one of the sides. It is not just, there is not only one way


of belonging. Thank you all very much.


Before we look at tomorrow's front pages. There are some alarming


briefings coming from Rome in the run up to the crucial European


Summit. Paul Mason has come back. Jeremy, it has been one of those


interesting days in the non- resolution of the eurocrisis. The


first thing that happened is Mr Von Rumpuy, decided to publish the


summit, with the fiscal and the political European eventually, the


whole -- political union, eventually the whole of the groups


getting together. Mrs Merkel chose to make a speech to one of their


political parties, which said there would be no pooling of debt, namely


eurobonds, as long as she is alive. It prompted a shout from from the


audience, "long may you live", at Mrs Merkel. The Italian Prime


Minister, appointed, you remember, last year, in a great technocratic


coup against Italy and Greece, it looks like he's on his last legs.


He can't come home in the summer without some resolution. He lickly


renounced the bogs of the German -- publicly renounced the boss of the


Germany bank. Silvio Berlusconi, the former Prime Minister, is


getting ready to move against Mr Monti, the technocrat, unless


something happens. So we have got a day-and-a-half until the summit,


and then something better happen. Thank you very much.


Tomorrow morning's front pages. Most going with George Osborne's


latest U-turn. This time on the That's all from Newsnight tonight,


I will leave you with the spectacle of the daily constitutional taken


by the 5,000 ducks longing to Mr Hong Minshun, from Taishou, we


break all four of our self-imposed rules for film clicks at the end of


the broke, no animals, no events that didn't happen today, no


A really warm and humid night, I really haven't seen many of those


this summer. Outbreaks of rain across Northern Ireland, northern


England and zone Scotland for a good part of the day. Further south


grey and mist year, brightening up, any sunshine across the midlands


and eastern England could striinger heavy and thundery showers. --


trigger heavy and thundery showers. Temperatures could get into the low


20s. Around the coast of south-west England it could stay dull and


misty, temperatures will struggle. Inland across Wales t should


brighten up and feel humid. Temperatures stuck at 13 or 14 on


the west coast if it turns dull and misty. A wet start in Northern


Ireland, dryer and brighter here in the afternoon. Cloudy with


outbreaks of rain across the day. The Highlands turning dryer. More


rain across southern Scotland and Northern Ireland on Thursday. That


is cause for concern. The rain building up over the next couple of


days. Further south, well it will be warm and humid, particularly


Download Subtitles